alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
INTHESUPREMECOURTOFTHESTATEOFMONTANADA20-0582WILKINSON,LLC,andJACKCOUCH,PlaintiffsandAppellants,v.SCOTTandCINDYERLER,LLP,SCOTTERLER,individually,ANDDOES1-10,DefendantsandAppellees.FILEDJAN122021SovvenGreenw000ClerkofSupremeCourfStateofMontanaORDERPlaintiffsandAppellantsWilkinson,LLC,andJackCouchhavefiledanoticeofappealfromtheorderoftheThirdJudicialDistrictCourt,CauseNo.DV-20-18.TheappealisfromanordercertifiedasfinalbytheDistrictCourtpursuanttoM.R.Civ.P.54(b).PursuanttoM.R.App.P.4(4)(b),wehavereviewedtheDistrictCourt'scertificationorderforcompliancewithM.R.App.P.6(6).Weconcludethecourt'scertificationorderisinsubstantialcompliancewiththerequirementsofRule6(6)andourcaselawinterpretingcertificationordersunderRule54(b).Therefore,ITISORDEREDthatthisappealmayproceed.TheClerkisdirectedtoprovidecopiesofthisOrdertoallcounselofrecord.DATEDthisdayofJanuary,2021.ChiefJustice01/12/2021Case Number: DA 20-0582All

A4 211,_. justices 2
**
**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 Annual Report of Juniper II Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year endedDecember 31, 2021 (the “Report”), I, Murray Grainger, Chief Executive 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 2002, that, to myknowledge: 

 
 1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and 

 
 2.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company as of and for the periods covered by the Report. 

 
Date: March 31, 2022     By: 
/s/ Murray Grainger
   Murray Grainger   *Chief Executive Officer*   *(Principal Executive Officer)***
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must be received not later than October 14, 2009.

**A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago**                     (Colette A. Fried, Assistant Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:                

*1. Robert D. Fleming and Phyllis A. Fleming*, both of Ipava, Illinois, as a group acting in concert, and Joseph J. Dietz, Lewistown, Illinois; to retain voting shares of ISB Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Ipava State Bank, both of Ipava, Illinois.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 24, 2009.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Deputy Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. E9-23462 Filed 9-28-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
42219.

#### FIELDS v. THE STATE.

Hall, Judge.

The defendant appeals from his conviction of possessing nontax-paid liquor upon which he received a sentence of 12 months or to pay a fine of $1,008. The defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the defendant was knowingly in possession of the whiskey.

“Where the evidence shows that intoxicating liquor was found in the place of business of one charged with possession of such liquor, an inference arises that said liquor was in the defendant’s possession. Such inference is not conclusive, but may be rebutted by showing that such liquor was not the defendant’s . property and was not there with his knowledge and consent.” *Kent v. State,*105 Ga. App. 312, 313 (124 SE2d 296). If nontax-paid whiskey is in the defendant’s business premises and he knows it, he possesses it by acquiescence and is criminally liable therefor. The defendant’s knowledge may be proved by facts and circumstances from which it could be reasonably inferred that he knowingly had, possessed, or con*424trolled the whiskey. *Rhoddenberry v. State,*50 Ga. App. 378, 380 (178 SE 170).

Submitted September 12, 1966

Decided October 6, 1966.

*Milton A. Carlton,*for appellant.

*H. R. Thompson, Solicitor,*for appellee.

From facts and circumstances in evidence in this case the jury could have reasonably inferred that the defendant knowingly possessed the whiskey. The evidence though disputed, included testimony that revenue agents, executing a search warrant, found 84 gallons of nontax-paid liquor in the closet of a small building of which the defendant was proprietor along with a motel and restaurant 50 or 60 feet away, and found siphoning poles and a funnel in the room, and found empty containers of the type used for whiskey in a part of the restaurant; and that when the officers first asked the defendant’s wife to let them in the building where the whiskey was found she stated that the building was rented and she didn’t have the key, and that they advised her that they would use whatever force was necessary to get in to execute the search warrant, and she then produced the key. *Harris v. State,*86 Ga. App. 607 (71 SE2d 861); *Kent v. State,*105 Ga. App. 312, supra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Nichols, P. J., and Deen, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from The Cosmetic
Center, Inc.'s March 28, 1997 consolidated financial statements and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such consolidated financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-26-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-28-1997
<CASH>                                           1,817
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,274
<ALLOWANCES>                                        10
<INVENTORY>                                     53,197
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                59,117
<PP&E>                                          17,777
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,352
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  67,791
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           16,702
<BONDS>                                             42
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            43
<OTHER-SE>                                      37,093
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    67,791
<SALES>                                         66,244
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                66,244
<CGS>                                           51,263
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   65,757
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (43)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 631
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (101)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (41)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (60)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (60)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 3
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

§ 3.459 Death compensation. ( a ) Death compensation will be apportioned if the child or children of the deceased veteran are not in the custody of the surviving spouse.
( b ) The surviving spouse may not be paid less than $65 monthly plus the amount of an aid and attendance allowance where applicable.
[40 FR 21725, May 19, 1975, as amended at 44 FR 45940, Aug. 6, 1979]
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-40126

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Candelario Orona, 

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:20-CR-114-4

Before Wiener, Dennis, and Haynes, Circuit Judges.

Per Curiam:*

Candelario Orona pleaded guilty to conspiring to possess with the 

intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 

and 841(b)(1)(A), and conspiring to commit money laundering in violation of 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-40126 Document: 00516214023 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/23/2022
No. 21-40126

2

18 U.S.C. §§ 1956(h) and 1956(a)(2). He now appeals his conviction for 

conspiracy to commit international money laundering. 

For the first time on appeal, Orona argues that the district court erred 

in accepting his guilty plea because there was an inadequate factual basis as 

to one element, specifically, the transport or attempted transport of funds 

between the United States and another country. Reviewing his argument for 

plain error in light of the entire record, we affirm. See United States v. Trejo, 

610 F.3d 308, 313 (5th Cir. 2010). Even if we assume that the district court 

clearly or obviously erred in finding a sufficient factual basis as to this 

element, Orona must show that the error affected his substantial rights. In 

order to do so in this context, a defendant “must show a reasonable 

probability that, but for the error, he would not have entered the plea.” 

United States v. Dominguez Benitez, 542 U.S. 74, 83 (2004). Orona did not 

even argue that he would not have pleaded guilty but for this alleged error; as 

such, he fails to show that the alleged error affected his substantial rights. See

id.; United States v. London, 568 F.3d 553, 560 (5th Cir. 2009).

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

Case: 21-40126 Document: 00516214023 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/23/2022
§ 1010.23 Amendment—filing and form. ( a ) *Filing.* If any change occurs in any representation of material fact required to be stated in an effective Statement of Record, an amendment shall be filed. The amendment shall be filed within 15 days of the date on which the developer knows, or should have known, that there has been a change in material fact. The amendment may be filed via the electronic means of submission described in § 1010.20(a).
( b ) *Form.* An amendment shall include by reference the prior Statement of Record except for any changes in material fact. A change in material fact shall be specifically described and supported by the same documentation which would be required for an initial submission. Any amendment shall be accompanied by: ( 1 ) A letter from the developer giving a clear and concise description of the purpose and significance of the amendment and referring to the section and page of the Statement of Record which is being amended, and
( 2 ) All pages of the Statement of Record, which have been amended, retyped in the required format to reflect the changes. The ILSRP number of the Statement of Record shall appear at the top of each page of the material submitted.
( c ) *Amendments to suspended filings.* Developers wishing to reactivate a suspended filing shall file the following: ( 1 ) Any amendments necessary to bring the filing into compliance, submitted in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section;
( 2 ) An activity report in the form prescribed by § 1010.310; and
( 3 ) An amendment fee, if required under § 1010.35(d)(2).
[76 FR 79489, Dec. 21, 2011, as amended at 81 FR 29116, May 11, 2016]
EXHIBIT 32


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                         AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                      SPORTS ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES, INC.
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


     I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge, the quarterly on Form
10-QSB of Sports Entertainment Enterprises, Inc. for the quarter ending June
30, 2004:

     (1) 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sports
Entertainment Enterprises, Inc.


Dated:  August 16, 2004




/s/ Vaso Boreta
Vaso Boreta
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer) and
Principal Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to Sports Entertainment
Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Sports Entertainment Enterprises,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
EX-10.59



 Exhibit 10.59 
  

			
	



		  
 111 Eighth Avenue

7th Floor

New York, NY 10011
 212.624.3700


 As of March 25, 2015 

Douglas W. Wamsley 
 c/o WebMD Health Corp. 

111 Eighth Avenue 
 New York, NY 10011-5201 

Dear Doug: 
 Reference is made to the grant of
(i) a nonqualified option to purchase 42,500 shares of WebMD Health Corp.’s (the “Company”) Common Stock made to you on March 25, 2015 (the “2015 Option”) as evidenced by the Option Agreement dated March 25,
2015 (the “Option Agreement”) and (ii) 16,000 shares of the Company’s restricted Common Stock made to you on the same date (the “2015 Restricted Stock Grant” and collectively with the 2015 Option, the “2015
Grants”) and evidenced by a Restricted Stock Agreement dated March 25, 2015 (the “Restricted Stock Agreement”). 
  

	 	1.	Impact of Certain Terminations following a Change of Control. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Option Agreement or the Restricted Stock Agreement, in the event of the termination
of your employment by the Company without Cause or by you for Good Reason (as such terms are defined in your Employment Agreement with the Company dated July 14, 2005, as amended, (the “Employment Agreement”)), in either case
following a Change of Control of the Company (as defined in the Company’s Amended and Restated 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan): 

  

	 	(a)	the 2015 Option, to the extent unvested, shall be deemed vested on the date of termination and shall remain outstanding as if you remained in the employ of the Company through the expiration of the originally scheduled
term of the 2015 Option; and 

  

	 	(b)	the 2015 Restricted Stock Grant, to the extent unvested, shall be deemed vested on the date of termination. 


The acceleration of vesting of the 2015 Grants and the continued exercisability of the 2015 Option are expressly conditioned on (i) a
release of claims (as described in the Employment Agreement) being executed by you and becoming effective and (ii) your continued compliance with the restrictive covenant agreements you have signed in connection with your employment. 








	 	2.	Effect on Agreements. Except as set forth herein, the Option Agreement and the Restricted Stock Agreement remain in full force and effect. 


 

			
	Sincerely,
	
	WEBMD HEALTH CORP
		
	By:		 /s/ Lewis H. Leicher

			Lewis H. Leicher
			Senior Vice President
	
	Agreed to:
	
	 /s/ Douglas W. Wamsley

	Douglas W. Wamsley


  
 2
Parraguirre 

REaliVE IM , htM 

State,112 Nev. 472, 475, 915 P.2d 282, 284 (1996) (internal quotation 

marks omitted); see also Harmelin v. Michigan,501 U.S. 957, 1000-01 

(1991) (plurality opinion). 

Appellant does not allege that the district court relied on 

impalpable or highly suspect evidence or that the relevant statutes are 

unconstitutional, and his sentence is within the parameters of the 

applicable statutes. SeeNRS 200.366, NRS 201.230, NRS 193.330. 

Appellant admitted to sexually molesting a child, and his sentence is not 

so disproportionate to his criminal acts as to shock the conscience. 

Therefore, we conclude that the imposed sentences do not constitute cruel 

and unusual punishment and the district court did not abuse its 

discretion. Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

cc: Hon. Elissa F. Cadish, District Judge 

Clark County Public Defender 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 

2
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2309 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 31, 2007 

Received 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 3916 Milgen Road in Columbus, Georgia, as 

the ‘‘Frank G. Lumpkin, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

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


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
2 

HR 2309 RDS

1 SECTION 1. FRANK G. LUMPKIN, JR. POST OFFICE BUILD2 ING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 3916 Milgen Road in Columbus, 

5 Georgia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Frank G. 

6 Lumpkin, Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Frank G. Lumpkin, 

11 Jr. Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 30, 2007. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


cnoel on PRODPC75 with BILLS
#### § 42.36 Post-hearing briefs.

The ALJ may require the parties to file post-hearing briefs. In any event, any party may file a post-hearing brief. The ALJ shall fix the time for filing the briefs, not to exceed 60 days from the date the parties receive the transcript of the hearing or, if applicable, the stipulated record. The briefs may be accompanied by proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. The ALJ may permit the parties to file reply briefs.
#### § 56.105 Accord with health planning.

A grant may be made under this part only if the applicable requirements of title XV of the Act relating to review and approval by the appropriate health planning agencies have been met.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 05-829 

________________________________________________________________________ 

WEAPONS 

Proliferation 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and UKRAINE 

Signed at Kiev August 29, 2005 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
UKRAINE 

Weapons: Proliferation 

 Agreement signed at Kiev August 29, 2005; 

 Entered into force August 29, 2005.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0065

_________________

ANIMALS OF MONTANA, INC., TROY HYDE,

Permit Holder,

 Petitioner and Appellant,

 v.

STATE OF MONTANA, DEPARTMENT 

OF FISH, WILDLIFE, AND PARKS,

 Respondent and Appellee.

O R D E R

_________________

Upon consideration of Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time, and good cause 

shown, Appellant is hereby granted an extension of time until January 21, 2021, within 

which to file and serve Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 16 2020

12/16/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0065
Exhibit 4.116


 


Maximum Pledge Contract


 


Contract No.:
2014JIYINZUIQUANZHIZIDI14140226


Pledgor : Ganglian Financial Leasing Co.,Ltd.


Pledgee : CITIC Shijiazhuang Branch


Signing Date : June 27, 2014


Pledge Definition : To ensure multiple loans Party B (Pledgee) has
lent to Hebei Xuhua Trading Co.,Ltd. on June 27, 2014, Party A (Pledgor) is willing to provide the Maximum Pledge Guarantee hereunder
for Party B.


 


Maximum Amount: RMB2,500,000,000


 


Pledge Term : From June 27, 2014 to December 23, 2015
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             619
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     1276
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (300)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                             241
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (206)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    1630
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              267
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           587
<OTHER-SE>                                         776
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      1630
<SALES>                                            125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   125
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    91
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     34
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        34
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .03
        

</TABLE>