alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 14, 2000

Mr. Terry Giles
P.O. Box 9558
16902 Via Cuesta Verde
Rancho Santa Fe, Ca. 92067

Sir,

         This letter executed by both you and Asia Web Holdings, Inc. shall
serve to set forth our understanding regarding your directorship and the options
the Company is issuing to you:

     1.  You shall serve on the Board of Directors of Asia Web Holdings, Inc. on
         a year to year basis for five years.

     2.  Asia Web Holdings, Inc. shall issue to you a non qualified option,
         covering 500,000 shares of Common Stock for a period of five years. The
         options shall vest at a rate of 100,000 per year, the first vesting to
         commence immediately with the signing of this agreement. The exercise
         price for the options shall be $2.00 per share.

     3.  The issuance and vesting of the options described in paragraph two
         shall be effective in all cases, save only (a) Giles resigns voluntary
         or (b) Giles is removed for cause from the Board of Directors prior to
         his serving for the full five years referred to in paragraph one.

     4.  The points outlined herein shall be embodied in a more formal agreement
         to be entered into between the parties.


Agreed to by:


 /S/ Terry Giles                                    /S/ Michael Schaffer
-----------------------------                      -----------------------------
Terry Giles                                        Asia Web Holdings, Inc.
                                                   Michael Schaffer, CEO
§ 261.10 Published information. ( a ) Federal Register. The Board publishes in the Federal Register for the guidance of the public: ( 1 ) Descriptions of the Board's central and field organization;
( 2 ) Statements of the general course and method by which the Board's functions are channeled and determined, including the nature and requirements of procedures;
( 3 ) Rules of procedure, descriptions of forms available and the place where they may be obtained, and instructions on the scope and contents of all papers, reports, and examinations;
( 4 ) Substantive rules, interpretations of general applicability, and statements of general policy;
( 5 ) Every amendment, revision, or repeal of the foregoing in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section; and
( 6 ) Other notices as required by law.
( b ) *Publications.* The Board maintains a list of publications on its website (at *www.federalreserve.gov/publications*). Most publications issued by the Board, including available back issues, may be downloaded from the website; some may be obtained through an order form located on the website (at *www.federalreserve.gov/files/orderform.pdf*) or by contacting Board Printing & Fulfillment, Federal Reserve Board, Washington, DC 20551. Subscription or other charges may apply for some publications.
( c ) *Publicly available information* — ( 1 ) *Electronic reading room.* The Board makes the following records available in its electronic reading room, *http://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/readingrooms.htm#rr1 .* ( i ) Final opinions, including concurring and dissenting opinions, as well as final orders and written agreements, made in the adjudication of cases;
( ii ) Statements of policy and interpretations adopted by the Board that are not published in the Federal Register;
( iii ) Administrative staff manuals and instructions to staff that affect the public;
( iv ) Copies of all records, regardless of form or format— ( A ) That have been released to any person under § 261.11; and
( B ) ( 1 ) That because of the nature of their subject matter, the Board has determined have become or are likely to become the subject of subsequent requests for substantially the same records; or
( 2 ) That have been requested three or more times;
( v ) A general index of the records referred to in paragraph (c)(1)(iv) of this section; and
( vi ) The public section of Community Reinvestment Act examination reports.
( 2 ) *Inspection in electronic format at Reserve Banks.* The Board may determine that certain classes of publicly available filings shall be made available for inspection in electronic format only at the Reserve Bank where those records are filed.
( 3 ) *Privacy protection.* The Board may delete identifying details from any public record to prevent a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
# C_2013263EN.01000501.xml

| 12.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 263/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 263/5

---

State aid — Decision to close an existing aid case as a result of acceptance of appropriate measures by an EFTA State

2013/C 263/06

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has proposed appropriate measures, which were accepted by Norway, on the following aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 30 April 2013 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Case number | : | 69911 |
| Decision number | : | 174/13/COL |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Financing of municipal waste collectors |
| Legal basis | : | The Pollution Control Act of 13 March 1981 No 6 (‘the Pollution Control Act’) and the Tax Act of 26 March 1999 No 14 (‘the Tax Act’) |
| Objective | : | n.a. |
| Economic sectors | : | Waste collection |
| Other information | : | Based on measures undertaken and further commitments given by the Norwegian authorities to amend the current financing regime and the removal of the tax exemption for municipal waste collectors, the Authority’s concerns regarding the incompatibility of municipal waste collectors’ financing were dispelled and the investigation closed. |

Date of adoption of the decision

:

30 April 2013

Case number

:

69911

Decision number

:

174/13/COL

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

:

Financing of municipal waste collectors

Legal basis

:

The Pollution Control Act of 13 March 1981 No 6 (‘the Pollution Control Act’) and the Tax Act of 26 March 1999 No 14 (‘the Tax Act’)

Objective

:

n.a.

Economic sectors

:

Waste collection

Other information

:

Based on measures undertaken and further commitments given by the Norwegian authorities to amend the current financing regime and the removal of the tax exemption for municipal waste collectors, the Authority’s concerns regarding the incompatibility of municipal waste collectors’ financing were dispelled and the investigation closed.

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
COLLECTED BY
Internet Archive
Wayback Machine
nsdlweb
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Theragenics Corporation®, (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 4, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, M.
Christine Jacobs, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

|(2) |  | The information contained in the Report
          fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the periods referred to in the Report.
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By: /s/ M. Christine
Jacobs M. Christine JacobsChief Executive OfficerJuly 30, 2004

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Theragenics Corporation® and
will be retained by Theragenics Corporation® and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
§ 1254.11 Pilot programs. ( a ) *Pilots permitted; duration of pilots.* An Enterprise may undertake pilot programs to evaluate credit score models. If a pilot program involves a credit score model not in current use by an Enterprise, the credit score model is not required to be approved under this part.
( b ) *Prior notice to FHFA.* Before commencing a pilot program, an Enterprise must submit the proposed pilot program to FHFA for review and approval. The Enterprise's submission to FHFA must include a complete and specific description of the pilot program, including its purpose, duration, and scope. FHFA may impose such terms, conditions, or limitations on the pilot program as FHFA determines to be appropriate.
42715.

#### LIBERTY LOAN & THRIFT CORPORATION v. MEEKS.

Felton, Chief Judge.

1. The trial judge was not obligated either to require the case to be reported, the provision of *Code Ann.*§ 6-805 (c) (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 24) being merely discretionary, or to inform the plaintiff of its right to have the case reported at its own expense under the provisions of § 6-805 (j).

2. The trial judge did not err in failing to approve a purported stipulation of the case, as provided by *Code Ann.*§ 6-805 (i), signed only by counsel for the appellant, which created a situation controlled by the provisions of *Code Ann.*§ 6-805 (g).

3. A valid filing of a transcript of evidence prepared from recollection requires the agreement of the parties or their counsel thereon, or, in case of the inability of the parties to agree as to the correctness of such transcript, the decision of the trial judge thereon. *Code Ann.*§ 6-805 (g). The holding in *Holloway v. Poppell,*114 Ga. App. 531 (152 SE2d 4), to the extent that an order of the trial judge certifying his inability to recall what occurred could validate such a transcript, is hereby overruled, for the reason that this would validate a transcript the correctness of which was vouched for by only one party-— the movant. The court correctly applied the law in the *Holloway*case, supra, although the meaning of the statute was inadvertently misstated in the first sentence of the opinion.

*847
      *Bell, P. J., Jordan, P. J., Hall, Eberhardt, Pannell, Deen, Quillian and Joslin, JJ., concur.*

Submitted April 3, 1967 —

Decided May 19, 1967

Rehearing denied June 9, 1967.

*Olon E. Scott,*for appellant.

*C. Winfred Smith,*for appellees.

4. Pursuant to the provisions of *Code Ann.*§ 6-809 (b) (Ga. L. 1965, pp. 18, 29; Ga. L. 1965, pp. 240, 241; Ga. L. 1966, pp. 493, 500), this court required the trial court to certify the reason for failing to approve appellant’s tendered transcript. In accordance with such order, the trial court certified the reason to be his inability to remember the evidence in the case.

5. A determination of the question presented in this appeal from the judgment overruling the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial involves necessarily a consideration of the evidence; and “where the evidence is not properly brought up all questions requiring a consideration of evidence will be resolved in favor of the judgment, and it will be affirmed.” *Holloway v. Poppell,*supra, p. 532, and cases cited. Therefore, since no approved transcript is in the record, the judgment of the court overruling the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial must be affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
#### § 262.1 Basis and scope.

This part is issued pursuant to section 552 of title 5 of the United States Code, which requires that every agency shall publish in the Federal Register statements of the general course and method by which its functions are channeled and determined, rules of procedure, and descriptions of forms available or the places at which forms may be obtained.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 4.3



                              CERTIFICATE OF TRUST

                                       OF

                           FIRST BUSEY CAPITAL TRUST I

         THIS CERTIFICATE OF TRUST OF FIRST BUSEY CAPITAL TRUST I (the "Trust"),
is being duly executed and filed by Wilmington Trust Company, a Delaware banking
corporation, Douglas C. Mills, Barbara J. Kuhl, and Barbara J. Jones, each an
individual, as trustees, to form a business trust under the Delaware Business
Trust Act (12 Del. C. Section 3801 et seq.) (the "Act").

                    1. NAME. The name of the business trust formed hereby is
         First Busey Capital Trust I.

                    2. DELAWARE TRUSTEE. The name and business address of the
         trustee of the Trust in the State of Delaware is Wilmington Trust
         Company, Rodney Square North, 1100 North Market Street, Wilmington,
         Delaware 19890-0001, Attention: Corporate Trust Administration.

                    3. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Certificate of Trust shall be
         effective on May 15, 2001.






<PAGE>   2



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned, being a trustee of the
Trust, has executed this Certificate of Trust in accordance with Section 3811(a)
of the Act.


                                    WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY, as Trustee



                                    By /s/ Kathleen A. Pedelini


                                       Name: Kathleen A. Pedelini
                                             ----------------------------------


                                       Title: Administrative Account Manager
                                              ---------------------------------

                                             /s/ Douglas C. Mills
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Douglas C. Mills, as Administrative Trustee


                                             /s/ Barbara J. Kuhl
                                    -------------------------------------------_
                                    Barbara J. Kuhl, as Administrative Trustee


                                             /s/ Barbara J. Jones
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Barbara J. Jones, as Administrative Trustee



                                       -2-
Exhibit 32.1
 
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
 
 
 In conjunction with the annual report of Sharps Compliance Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Burton J. Kunik, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board 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, to the best of my knowledge that
 
 (1)
The Form 10-K/A report for the year ended June 30, 2009, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 25, 2010, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (2)
The information contained in the Form 10-K/A report for the year ended June 30, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sharps Compliance Corp.
 
 
 Date: June 25, 2010
 By:  /s/ BURTON J. KUNIK
 Burton J. Kunik
 Chairman of the Board
 Chief Executive Officer
 Principal Executive Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.
ATORBE AARON ISIBOR, AKA Solomon Okuonghae,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 20

- 50365

D.C. No. 2:17

- cr

- 00143

- RGK

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California R. Gary Klausner, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted July 19, 2021 * *

Before: SCHROEDER, SILVERMAN, and MURG U IA, Circuit Judges.

Atorbe Aaron Isibor appeals pro se from the district court ’s order denying

his motion for compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i) . We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review for abuse of discretion, see

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). Accordingly, Isibor’s request for oral argument is denied. 

# FILED

JUL 26 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 50365

United States v. Aruda , 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021), and we affirm

. Isibor argues that the district court abused its discretion by concluding that

his medical conditions did not provide a basis for relief, an d by relying on the

nature of his offense rather than his rehabilitative efforts and other mitigating

circumstances. We disagree. The court acknowledged that Isibor’s medical

conditions were “not insignificant
, ” but reasonably concluded that they were no t

serious enough to justify release, given the circumstances at his prison and the fact

that only one of his conditions subjected him to a potentially greater risk from

COVID

- 19. Moreover, the court did not abuse its discretion in weighing the 18

U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and concluding that, given the nature and scope of

Isibor’s offense, as well as his criminal history, release was not warranted. See

United States v. Robertson , 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018) (a district court

abuses its discretion o nly if its decision is illogical, implausible, or without support

in the record) ; United States v. Gutierrez

- Sanchez , 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir.

2009) (“ The weight to be given the various factors in a particular case is for the

discretion of the district court. ”). Finally, contrary to Isibor’s contention, there is

no indication in the record that the district court impermissibly treated U.S.S.G.

§ 1B1.13 as binding

. See Aruda
, 993 F.3d at 802

.

AFFIRMED.
42461.

#### LEVINE v. NOWELL.

Eberhardt, Judge.

Conceding, but without deciding, that the evidence demanded a finding that the defendant was negligent and that this negligence was the proximate cause of the automobile collision, the evidence authorized but.did not demand a finding that plaintiff had suffered any injury attributable to the collision. The jury is the judge of the veracity of parties and witnesses; under the evidence in this record they were authorized to disbelieve plaintiff’s claim of injury as a result of the collision. Accordingly the judgment for defendant, based upon the verdict of the jury, will *80not be disturbed. *Miller v. Dean,*113 Ga. App. 869 (1) (150 SE2d 191).

*Felton, C. J., and Hall, J., concur.*

Argued January 3, 1967

Decided January 11, 1967

Rehearing denied January 23, 1967.

*Edenfield, Heyman & Sizemore, Newell Edenfield, Benjamin H. Oehlert, III,*for appellant.

*Long, Weinberg & Ansley, Palmer H. Ansley,*for appellee.

*Judgment- affirmed.*
MLP

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0722

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRYAN ARVIDSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT OF EXTENSION

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30-day extension of time, and

good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and

including August 5, 2024, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

July 1 2024

07/01/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0722
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION FOUND ON
PAGES 3 THROUGH 6 OF THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-QSB FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
FEBRUARY 28, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                          50,447
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,446,019
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (25,000)
<INVENTORY>                                        222
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,484,338
<PP&E>                                         795,774
<DEPRECIATION>                                 697,441
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,617,339
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,834,390
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,155
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,360,735)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,617,339
<SALES>                                        413,454
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               413,454
<CGS>                                          435,474
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  435,474
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,018
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,151
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (114,902)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (114,902)
<DISCONTINUED>                                (88,864)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (114,902)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                             OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE

The undersigned hereby certifies that she is the duly elected Chief Executive
Officer and Co-President of Lifef/x, Inc. (the "Corporation"), a Nevada
corporation, and that on July 6, 2000, at a special telephonic meeting of the
Board of Directors of Lifef/x, Inc., the board of directors of the Corporation
voted to increase the number of shares reserved for issuance pursuant to options
granted under the Corporation's 1999 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the "Plan") to a
total of 10,539,944 shares.

Attached is a true and correct copy of the portion of the Minutes of the July 6,
2000 meeting of the Board of Directors of the Corporation memorializing the
increase in shares reserved for issuance under the Plan.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certificate as of July 18,
2000.


                                  /s/ Lucille S. Salhany
                                  -------------------------------------------
                                  Lucille S. Salhany, Chief Executive Officer
                                  Co-President and Director
<PAGE>

                                                                       Exhibit A

                                  Lifefx, Inc.

                           Board of Directors Meeting
                                     7/6/00

The next item of business was a discussion of an increase in the stock option
pool. Ms. Salhany stated that the Company would need to have additional option
shares available for issuance to new and existing employees.  Ms. Salhany
suggested that the option pool be increased to a number of shares equal to 20%
of the fully diluted number of common shares, exclusive of the proposed increase
in the option pool. After discussion, on a motion by Nancy Hawthorne and
seconded by Richard Guttendorf, the Board unanimously agreed to increase the
stock option pool to a total of 10,539,944 shares.