alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.1
                            AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO THE
                                PMI GROUP, INC.
                     STOCK PLAN FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
                 (Amended and Restated as of August 16, 1999)

     THE PMI GROUP, INC., having amended and restated The PMI Group, Inc. Stock
Plan for Non-Employee Directors (the "Plan") in its entirety most recently
effective as of August 16, 1999, and amended the restated Plan on one subsequent
occasion, hereby again amends the restated Plan as follows:

     1.   A new Section 4.4 is added immediately after Section 4.3 to read as
follows:

          4.4  Plan Merger.  Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this
               -----------
     Section 4, the Plan shall be merged into The PMI Group, Inc. Equity
     Incentive Plan effective as of June 1, 2000.  In this connection, the
     Shares that were available for grant under the Plan immediately prior to
     June 1, 2000, the Shares subject to outstanding Awards, and any Shares that
     are returned to the Plan pursuant to Section 4.2, shall be transferred to
     the Equity Incentive Plan for issuance thereunder.

     2.   A new Section 5.1.3 is added immediately after Section 5.1.2 to read
as follows:

          5.1.3  No Further Awards of Options after May 31, 2000.
                 -----------------------------------------------
     Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Section 5, the Plan shall be
     merged into The PMI Group, Inc. Equity Incentive Plan effective as of June
     1, 2000.  Accordingly, no further Awards of Options shall be granted under
     the Plan after May 31, 2000.  The terms of the Plan, as in effect prior to
     June 1, 2000, shall govern any outstanding Awards.

     3.   A new Section 6.6 is added immediately after Section 6.5 to read as
follows:

          6.6  No Further Awards of Restricted Stock after May 31, 2000.
               --------------------------------------------------------
     Notwithstanding any contrary provision of this Section 6, the Plan shall be
     merged into The PMI Group, Inc. Equity Incentive Plan effective as of June
     1, 2000.  Accordingly, no further Awards of Restricted Stock shall be
     granted under the Plan after May 31, 2000.  The terms of the Plan, as in
     effect prior to June 1, 2000, shall govern any outstanding Awards.

     4.   This Amendment No. 2 to the restated Plan shall be effective as of
June 1, 2000, provided that The PMI Group, Inc. Amended and Restated Equity
Incentive Plan is approved by the Company's stockholders at the 2001 Annual
Meeting of Stockholders.
<PAGE>

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its duly authorized officer, has
executed this Amendment No. 2 to the restated Plan on the date indicated below.

                                         THE PMI GROUP, INC.

                                         By:  /s/ Charles Broom

                                         Title: VP HR

                                         Date: 6/11/01
City Court of New York — General Term,

December, 1900.

Before O’Dwyer and Schuchman, JJ.

#### The Mutual Bank, Respondent, v. Robert Beggs et al., Appellants.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff against the defendants, entered' upon a verdict directed By the court.

Isaac N. Miller, for appellants; Mc-Crea, Sommerville & Taylor (George H. Taylor, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.

Judgment and order appealed from affirmed, with costs. No opinion.
#### Howell Wade, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. The State of Florida, *Defendant in Error.*

Opinion Filed June 21, 1923.

A Writ of Error to the Circuit Court for Madison County; M. F. Horne, Judge.

*Chas. E. Davis,*for Plaintiff in Error;

*Rivers Buford,*Attorney General, and *J. B. Caines,*Assistant, for the State.

Per Curiam.

Upon an indictment charging murder in the first degree by shooting, the defendant was convicted of manslaughter and took writ of error.

There is ample evidence to sustain the conviction; and even if errors of procedure were committed as contended, *509they could not reasonably have been prejudicial to the defendant in view of his own testimony and other circumstances shown. See Shuler v. State, 84 Fla. 414, 93 South. Rep. 672, and authorities cited.

Affirmed.

Taylor, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, West and Terrell, JJ., concur.

Browne, J., dissents.
EXHIBIT
      32.1





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





Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned hereby certifies that, to his
      knowledge, the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the “Report”) of ANTs software
      inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), for the period ended September 30,
      2007:





1.  Fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




2.  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





This
      certification is being provided
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of this Report, nor
      is
      it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.





Date:    November
      8, 2007





By:           _/s/
      Joseph
      Kozak


Joseph
      Kozak, Chief Executive Officer and President





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
      Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company, and will be retained by the
      Company, and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon
      request.
#### COLLMAN V. THE STATE.

(Decided April 17, 1913.)

Appeal from Dallas Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. B. M. Miller.

A. D. Pitts, and Reese & Reese, for appellant. R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Walker, P. j. —

Affirmed.
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
   
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                              SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                    $   412,823
<SECURITIES>                                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                               1,811,007
<ALLOWANCES>                                        0
<INVENTORY>                                         0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            2,398,074
<PP&E>                                     16,123,560
<DEPRECIATION>                              6,794,390
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             11,880,781
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       5,341,102
<BONDS>                                     1,064,394
<COMMON>                                    3,021,833
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                   341,670
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,054,290)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               11,880,781
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            6,691,634
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               5,705,514
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              462,450
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               523,670
<INCOME-TAX>                                  416,900
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           106,770
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                  106,770
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .02
        

    

</TABLE>
§ 264a.6 What other definitions and rules of construction apply for purposes of this part? For purposes of this part— ( a ) *Bank holding company* means any company that controls a bank (as provided in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841 *et seq.*)).
( b ) A person shall be deemed to act as a *consultant* for a bank or other company only if such person works directly on matters for, or on behalf of, such bank or other company.
( c ) *Control* has the meaning given in section 2 of the Bank Holding Company Act, with respect to banking holding companies, and has the meaning given in section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act, with respect to savings and loan holding companies.
( d ) *Depository institution* has the meaning given in section 3 of the FDI Act and includes an uninsured branch or agency of a foreign bank, if such branch or agency is located in any State.
( e ) *Federal Reserve* means the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Reserve Banks.
( f ) *Foreign bank* means any foreign bank or company described in section 8(a) of the International Banking Act of 1978 (12 U.S.C. 3106(a)).
( g ) *Insured depository institution* has the meaning given in section 3 of the FDI Act.
( h ) *Savings and loan holding company* means any company that controls a savings association (as provided in section 10 of the Home Owners' Loan Act (12 U.S.C. 1461 *et seq.*))
[70 FR 69638, Nov. 17, 2005, as amended at 76 FR 56606, Sept. 13, 2011]
§ 604.405 Notice of public observation. ( a ) A member of the public is not required to give advance notice to the Farm Credit Administration of an intention to exercise the right of public observation of an open meeting of the Board. However, in order to permit the Farm Credit Administration to determine the amount of space and number of seats which must be made available to accommodate individuals who desire to exercise the right of public observation, such individuals are requested to give notice to the Farm Credit Administration at least two business days before the start of the open meeting of the intention to exercise such right.
( b ) Notice of intention to exercise the right of public observation may be given in writing, in person, or by telephone to the official designated in § 604.440 of this part.
( c ) Individuals who have not given advance notice of intention to exercise the right of public observation will not be permitted to attend and observe the open meeting of the Board if the available space and seating are necessary to accommodate individuals who gave advance notice of such intention to the Farm Credit Administration.
[42 FR 12161, Mar. 3, 1977. Redesignated and amended at 51 FR 41942, Nov. 20, 1986]
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 1 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 2 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 3 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 4 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 5 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 6 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 7 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 8 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 9 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 10 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 11 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 12 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 13 of 14
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:22615-11 Filed:10/17/22 Entered:10/17/22 09:10:24 Desc:

Exhibit 9 part 3 - Second Amended POC Page 14 of 14
# C_2023204EN.01002901.xml

| 12.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 204/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 204/29

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

(2023/C 204/08)

Image 1

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by Cyprus

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. For the purpose of informing the public and all parties who handle the coins, the Commission publishes a description of the designs of all new coins (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), euro-area Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the European Union providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national face features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

Issuing country: Cyprus

Subject of commemoration: The 60th anniversary of the foundation of the Central Bank of Cyprus

Description of the design: The design depicts tools on a microchip symbolising the stability of the economy in the modern industrial and digital era secured by the Central Bank of Cyprus, which celebrates 60 years of existence. The issuing country's name ‘ΚYΠΡΟΣ KIBRIS’ and the dates ‘1963-2023’ are at the bottom. Additionally, the phrase ‘60 ΧΡOΝΙΑ ΑΠO ΤΗΝ IΔΡΥΣΗ ΤΗΣ ΚΕΝΤΡΙKHΣ ΤΡAΠΕΖΑΣ ΤΗΣ ΚYΠΡΟΥ’ (i.e. 60 years since the foundation of the Central Bank of Cyprus) is inscribed on the inner part of the national side of the coin. The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Estimated number of coins to be issued: 412 000

Date of issue: Second/third quarter of 2023

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, p. 1 for the national faces of all the coins issued in 2002.

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, p. 52).

---
108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3185

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 38 Spring Street in Nashua,

New Hampshire, as the ‘‘Hugh Gregg Post Office Building’’.

108TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3185

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 38 Spring Street in Nashua, New Hampshire,

as the ‘‘Hugh Gregg Post Office Building’’.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 3185 EH

1 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

2 The facility of the United States Postal Service lo3 cated at 38 Spring Street in Nashua, New Hampshire,

4 shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Hugh Gregg Post

5 Office Building’’.

6 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

7 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

8 paper, or other record of the United States to the facility

9 referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference

10 to the ‘‘Hugh Gregg Post Office Building’’.

Passed the House of Representatives November 17,

2003.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### ANNIE GROTSKY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, v. CHARLES GROTSKY, INC., PROSECUTOR-RESPONDENT.

Submitted February 16, 1940 —

Decided April 25, 1940.

*573For the appellant, *James A. Hamill (Paul J. Duffy,*of counsel).

For the respondent, *Henry M. Grosman.*

Per Curiam.

Whether or not the mishap which befell the deceased employe arose out of and in the course of his employment was a mixed question of law and fact. The evidence presented an issue of fact; and the Supreme Court, in an opinion by Mr. Justice Case, resolved the question in the negative. It was found “as a fact that the decedent was at the time of the accident on his way home and that he was not in the act of going to his brother’s house either to deliver the store keys or for any other purpose.” And it is fundamental in our appellate procedure that findings of fact on conflicting evidence, or on uncontroverted evidence reasonably susceptible of divergent inferences, are not reviewable on error.

But appellant maintains that, even so, the accident occurred while the deceased “was engaged in a special errand for his employer — to deliver the customer’s suit;” that he “was injured by an automobile on his way home after delivering a suit of clothes to his employer’s customer;” and that his “errand” would not have ended until he reached “his doorstep.” The principle declared in *Traynor*v. *City of Buffalo,*208 *App. Div.*216; 203 *N. Y. S.*590, and *Gibbs*v. *R. H. Macy & Co., Inc.,*212 *N. Y. S.*428; *affirmed,*242 *N. Y.*551, is deemed to be applicable.

There is no occasion to consider this question. It was not raised below; and, under a well-settled procedural rule, it *574cannot be raised here for the first time. This is not a mere technical deficiency, for the applicability of this principle depends upon the scope of the contract of service. This case was tried and reviewed upon the theory that,, at the time he sustained the fatal injury, the deceased was on his way to deliver the store keys to the president of the corporation, and therefore was engaged in the master’s service so as to bring the accident within the Compensation act.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

*For affirmance*— The Chief Justice, Parker, Bodine, Heher, Perskie, Heteield, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Hague, JJ. 11.

*For reversal*— None.
# General Pulaski Memorial Day, 2009

Each year on this day, Americans pause to remember a patriot and champion of liberty who fought valiantly for the freedom of our Nation. During our struggle for independence, General Casimir Pulaski displayed heroic leadership and ultimately sacrificed his life in service to our country. His commitment to liberty remains an inspiration to us today, 230 years later, and it serves as a reflection of the many contributions Polish Americans have made to our national identity.

Born in Poland in 1745, Brigadier General Casimir Pulaski witnessed the occupation of Poland by foreign troops during his youth. He joined the struggle for Polish independence in 1768, fighting alongside his father with unwavering determination. Despite the tremendous courage of Pulaski and his compatriots, the foreign forces prevailed and Poland was divided among three of its neighbors. The young Casimir Pulaski was exiled, and, while in Paris, met America’s envoy to France, Benjamin Franklin, and learned of our nascent quest for independence.

Arriving in America during the summer of 1777, General Pulaski quickly earned a commission and led his troops with admirable skill in a number of important campaigns. He would eventually become known as the “Father of the American Cavalry.” In 1779, Pulaski was mortally wounded during the siege of Savannah while trying to rally his troops under heavy enemy fire. Before laying down his life for the United States, this Polish and American hero had earned a reputation for his idealism and his courageous spirit.

Pulaski’s ideals live on today in the many Polish-American communities across the country. These neighborhoods continue to celebrate Polish culture, while adding immeasurably to our national identity. Their contributions have expanded our collective knowledge, pushing the boundaries of science, business, and the arts. With each passing year, the cooperation between the United States and Poland grows, supported by the dedication and commitment of Polish Americans to our shared history. Today, as we remember General Pulaski, we celebrate our strong friendship with Poland, and honor those Americans of Polish heritage.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim Sunday, October 11, 2009, as General Pulaski Memorial Day. I encourage all Americans to commemorate this occasion with appropriate programs and activities paying tribute to Casimir Pulaski and honoring all those who defend the freedom of our great Nation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ninth day of October, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fourth.

[FR Doc. E9-25083

Billing code 3195-W9-P
; iFFARTMENT OF 

^ i-;ANSPORWION ^ 

SERVED NOVEMBER 23 , 2010 -''''^' OPERATIONS 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

WESTERN AVIATORS, INC. 

FAA DOCKET No. CP10NM0003 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

DMS No. FAA-2010-0314 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

On April 29, 2010, the Federal Aviation Administration (hereinafter referred to as 

"Complainant") filed a Complaint. Respondent Western Aviators, Inc. (hereinafter 

referred to as "Respondent") had on March 15, 2010 filed a Request for Hearing. 

On November 19, 2010, Complainant withdrew its Complaint, citing settlement. 

14 C.F.R. § 13.215 states: "At any time before or during a hearing, an agency 

attorney may withdraw a complaint or party may withdraw a request for a hearing 

without the consent of the administrative law judge. If an agency attorney 

withdraws the complaint or a party withdraws the request for a hearing and the 

answer, the administrative law judge shall dismiss the proceedings under this 

subpart with prejudice." 

WHEREFORE, the within filed Withdrawal of Complaint having been read and 

considered, it is ORDERED as follows: 

1. Complainant's Withdrawal of Complaint is hereby granted; and 

2. This proceeding be and is hereby dismissed with prejudice. 
2 

SO ORDERED. 

Attachment - Service List 

b 

yj'(JOia<^ C . (jTh(pC^<-^^iJi^ 

Richard C. Goodwin 

Administrative Law Judge 
FAA Docket No. CP10NM0003 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Richard L. Fowler, President 

Western Aviators, Inc., Respondent 

2533 Lanyon Drive 

Longmont, CO 80503 

TEL: 303-776-2733 

FAX: 303-774-8435 

Laura E. Jennings, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Chief Counsel, AGC-30 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

TEL: 202-267-3452 

FAX: 202-267-5106 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

East Building Ground Floor, Room El2-320 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430.