alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
r -v1 mn ktrs= 6 , \_ ,LL IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

# F;LED DEC 2 8 2021 DA 21-0394
JACOB SMITH,

Petitioner and Appellant,

v. STATE OF MONTANA, et al.,

Respondent and Appellee. Bovven Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana
ORDER

Through counsel, Appellees City of Helena and Bryan Fischer ("the City") move this Court for dismissal of appeal because self-represented Appellant Jacob Smith has not filed his openingbriefwithin the extended time. The briefwas due on November 30, 2021. The City assertsthat this failurewarrants dismissal,pursuant toM. R. App. P. 13(3). Smith responds that he delivered his brieffor mailing on October 27, 2021, when he was held at the Montana State Prison. He states that he has since been moved to CoreCivic (formerly known as Crossroads Correctional Center) in Shelby and that he only recently obtained access to a typewriter as well as his legal documents after being initially quarantined for COVID-19. Smith requests additional time to prepare and file his briefagain. This Court is not inclined to impose a harsh sanction of dismissal here when the appellant is incarcerated, has been recently re-located, and has filed a response to the motion to dismiss. "While pro se litigants may be given a certain amount of latitude in their proceedings, they may not proceed in such a fashion as to abuse thejudicial process, prejudicing the opposing party's interests as well as other litigants' access to thejudicial system." Fed. Land Bank v. Heidema, 224 Mont. 64, 68, 727 P.2d 1336, 1338 (1986). While Smith's brief is now untimely, the City has not alleged it is prejudiced and we conclude that the circumstances warrant allowing the appeal to proceed. Therefore, 12/28/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0394IT IS ORDERED that the City's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED and that this appeal

rnay proceed. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Smith is GRANTED until January 28, 2022 to file his opening brief. Failure to file his opening briefwithin that time frame will result in dismissal ofthis appeal without further notice. TheClerkofthe SupremeCourt isdirectedto providea copy ofthis Ordertocounsel ofrecord and to Jacob Smith personally. DATED this 1

/ 4 --t day ofDecember, 2021.



# LA•i

2/ 1- SLi Justices
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,798
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   77,795
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     53,006
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               141,258
<PP&E>                                         258,558
<DEPRECIATION>                                (87,025)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 388,489
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          103,804
<BONDS>                                        301,038
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (8,459)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   388,489
<SALES>                                        371,533
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               371,533
<CGS>                                          303,886
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  339,499
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,322
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,148
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (457)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,618
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,650)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  (522)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,172)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Dorian L. Nicol, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of QueenstakeResources Ltd.;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company asof, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the company and have:

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the company, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by theannual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, tothe company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the company’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

Date:  March  30, 2006

 
| /s/ Dorian L. Nicol                                     |   |   |
|---------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
| Dorian L. Nicol, President and Chief  Executive Officer |   |

 

----
§ 25.23 Load distribution limits. ( a ) Ranges of weights and centers of gravity within which the airplane may be safely operated must be established. If a weight and center of gravity combination is allowable only within certain load distribution limits (such as spanwise) that could be inadvertently exceeded, these limits and the corresponding weight and center of gravity combinations must be established.
( b ) The load distribution limits may not exceed— ( 1 ) The selected limits;
( 2 ) The limits at which the structure is proven; or
( 3 ) The limits at which compliance with each applicable flight requirement of this subpart is shown.
§ 25.1143 Engine controls. ( a ) There must be a separate power or thrust control for each engine.
( b ) Power and thrust controls must be arranged to allow— ( 1 ) Separate control of each engine; and
( 2 ) Simultaneous control of all engines.
( c ) Each power and thrust control must provide a positive and immediately responsive means of controlling its engine.
( d ) For each fluid injection (other than fuel) system and its controls not provided and approved as part of the engine, the applicant must show that the flow of the injection fluid is adequately controlled.
( e ) If a power or thrust control incorporates a fuel shutoff feature, the control must have a means to prevent the inadvertent movement of the control into the shutoff position. The means must— ( 1 ) Have a positive lock or stop at the idle position; and
( 2 ) Require a separate and distinct operation to place the control in the shutoff position.
[Amdt. 25-23, 35 FR 5677, Apr. 8, 1970, as amended by Amdt. 25-38, 41 FR 55467, Dec. 20, 1976; Amdt. 25-57, 49 FR 6849, Feb. 23, 1984]
<Page>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 32

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

     In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Seacoast Financial
Services Corporation (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned (Kevin G. Champagne, President and CEO) and
(Francis S. Mascianica, Jr., Treasurer, as Principal Financial and Accounting
Officer) of the Company, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the
signatory, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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.

          This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, and shall not be deemed to be a part of the Report or "filed" for any
purpose whatsoever.


/s/ Kevin G. Champagne                     /s/ Francis S. Mascianica, Jr.
---------------------------------------    -------------------------------------
Kevin G. Champagne                         Francis S. Mascianica, Jr.
President and Chief Executive Officer      Treasurer, as Principal Financial and
                                           Accounting Officer


Date:  March 11, 2004                      Date: March 11, 2004

                                       108
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

98–344 2016

114th Congress, 2d Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – Senate Document 114–11 

VETO—S.J. RES. 22 

(PM 37) 

MESSAGE 

FROM

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

RETURNING

WITHOUT MY APPROVAL S.J. RES. 22, PROVIDING FOR CONGRESSIONAL DISAPPROVAL UNDER CHAPTER 8 OF TITLE 5, UNITED 

STATES CODE, OF THE RULE SUBMITTED BY THE CORPS OF 

ENGINEERS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF ‘‘WATERS OF THE UNITED 

STATES’’ UNDER THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL 

ACT 

JANUARY 20, 2016.—Ordered to be printed 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SDOCE:\Seals\Congress.#13

smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SDOC
(1) 

To the Senate of the United States: 

I am returning herewith without my approval S.J. Res. 22, a resolution that would nullify a rule issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army to clarify the jurisdictional boundaries of the Clean Water Act. The rule, which is a 

product of extensive public involvement and years of work, is critical to our efforts to protect the Nation’s waters and keep them 

clean; is responsive to calls for rulemaking from the Congress, industry, and community stakeholders; and is consistent with decisions of the United States Supreme Court. 

We must protect the waters that are vital for the health of our 

communities and the success of our businesses, agriculture, and energy development. As I have noted before, too many of our waters 

have been left vulnerable. Pollution from upstream sources ends up 

in the rivers, lakes, reservoirs, and coastal waters near which most 

Americans live and on which they depend for their drinking water, 

recreation, and economic development. Clarifying the scope of the 

Clean Water Act helps to protect these resources and safeguard 

public health. Because this resolution seeks to block the progress 

represented by this rule and deny businesses and communities the 

regulatory certainty and clarity needed to invest in projects that 

rely on clean water, I cannot support it. I am therefore vetoing this 

resolution. 

BARACK OBAMA. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, January 19, 2016. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with SDOC
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO 

In re: 

 

THE FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT AND 

MANAGEMENT BOARD FOR PUERTO 

RICO, 

 PROMESA 

 Title III 

 

 

 as representative of 

THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO 

RICO, et al 

 Debtors 

 

 No. 17 BK 3283-LTS 

 (Jointly Administered) 

 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE AND REQUEST FOR SERVICE 

TO THE HONORABLE COURT: 

 The undersigned is admitted and authorized to practice in this Court, and hereby appears in 

the Jointly Administered Title III cases as counsel for NeoMed Center, Inc., (“NeoMed”), formerly 

known as Gurabo Community Health Center, Inc., a party in interest, and requests service of copies 

of all filings, orders, notices and documents henceforth to: 

 

 s/SERGIO A. RAMIREZ DE ARELLANO_____ 

 SERGIO A. RAMIREZ DE ARELLANO 

 SARLAW LLC

 Attorneys for NeoMed 

 Banco Popular Center, Suite 1022 

 209 Muñoz Rivera Avenue 

 San Juan, PR 00918-1009

 Tel. 765-2988; 764-6392 

 Fax No. 765-2973 

 USDC No. 126804 

 sramirez@sarlaw.com

 

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3109 Filed:05/21/18 Entered:05/21/18 18:39:44 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 2
2

 

 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

WE HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been filed 

electronically on this day with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF System, which will send 

generate a notice to all CM/ECF participants in this case.

 

 s/SERGIO A. RAMIREZ DE ARELLANO____ 

 SERGIO A. RAMIREZ DE ARELLANO

Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:3109 Filed:05/21/18 Entered:05/21/18 18:39:44 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 2
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 201 3

- NM

- 177

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
```

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 81589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32780]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, January 7, 2011.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-32780 Filed 12-23-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
###### Editorial Note on Part 741

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 741 appear at 84 FR 1608, Feb. 5, 2019.

#### § 741.225 Loan participations.

Any credit union that is insured pursuant to Title II of the Act must adhere to the requirements stated in § 701.22 of this chapter, except that federally insured state-chartered credit unions are exempt from the requirement in § 701.22(b)(4).

[78 FR 37958, June 25, 2013]
#### Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. T. M. Weir, *Defendant in Error.*

On Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

— Even if the plaintiff was a trespasser upon the public highway in operating thereon an unlicensed motor vehicle, the statute quoted in the opinion makes the defendant railroad company “liable for any *75damage done to - property, by the running of the locomotives, or cars, or other machinery of such company, - unless the company shall make it appear that their agents have exercised all ordinary and reasonable care and diligence, the presumption in all cases being against the company.” See Butler v. Southern Ry. Co., 63 Fla. -, 58 South. Rep. 225.

On this record it cannot be said as matter of law that the defendant did exercise all ordinary care and diligence to prevent the injury to the plaintiff’s automobile; and as it was apparent that the damages were not apportioned as required by the statute, the judgment was reversed. If on proper proceedings it be shown that the defendant did exercise all ordinary and reasonable care and diligence required by the circumstances of the case, there can under the statute be no recovery. If negligence of both parties appears the statute requires that “the damages shall be diminished or increased by the jury in proportion to the amount of de fault attributable to” the plaintiff.

Rehearing denied.
|   | 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. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/      O’Neil Nalavadi                                    |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
| O’Neil      Nalavadi                                        |
| Senior      Vice President                                        |
| Chief      Financial Officerand      Principal Accounting Officer |
|                                                              |
| March      11, 2010                                               |

----
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-22-00037-CR

Willie Earl HAYWOOD,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 456th District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 20-0970-CR-A

Honorable Heather H. Wright, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ, JUSTICE RIOS, AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

MODIFIED to delete the assessment of court appointed attorney’s fees against appellant Willie 

Earl Haywood, and the judgment is AFFIRMED AS MODIFIED. The trial court clerk is 

ORDERED to prepare and file in this case a corrected bill of costs showing that no court appointed 

attorney’s fees are assessed against Haywood. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

SIGNED September 21, 2022.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice
#### § 187.1 Scope.

This part prescribes fees only for FAA services for which fees are not prescribed in other parts of this chapter or in 49 CFR part 7. The fees for services furnished in connection with making information available to the public are prescribed exclusively in 49 CFR part 7. Appendix A to this part prescribes the methodology for computation of fees for certification services performed outside the United States. Appendix C to this part prescribes the methodology for computation of fees for production certification-related services performed outside the United States.

[Docket FAA-2015-3597, Amdt. 187-36, 81 FR 85853, Nov. 29, 2016]
AGREEMENT OF SUBSTITUTION AND AMENDMENT OF COMMON STOCKS RIGHTS AGREEMENT



 
Exhibit 10.1

 
AGREEMENT OF SUBSTITUTION AND AMENDMENT OF

COMMON STOCK RIGHTS AGREEMENT 
 
This Agreement of Substitution and Amendment is entered into as of February 14, 2003, by and between
Millipore Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”) and American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, a New York banking corporation (“AST”). 
 
RECITALS 
 

	A.	 	On April 16, 1998 the Company entered into a Common Stock Rights Agreement (the “Rights Agreement”) with The First National Bank of Boston (subsequently
Equiserve Trust Company, N.A.) (the “Predecessor Agent”) as rights agent. 

 

	B.	 	The Company wishes to remove the Predecessor Agent and substitute AST as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement. 

 

	C.	 	The Company has given the Predecessor Agent notice of removal of the Predecessor Agent as rights agent. 

 
AGREEMENT 
 
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of other consideration, the sufficiency of which
is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 
 

	1.	 	Section 21 of the Rights Agreement is hereby amended to provide that any successor rights agent shall, at the time of its appointment as rights agent, have a
combined capital and surplus of at least $10 million, rather than $50 million. 

 

	2.	 	The Company hereby appoints AST as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement, to serve in that capacity for the consideration and subject to all of
the terms and conditions of the Rights Agreement. 

 

	3.	 	AST hereby accepts the appointment as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement and agrees to serve in that capacity for the consideration and
subject to all of the terms and conditions of the Rights Agreement. 








 

	4.	 	From and after the effective date hereof, each and every reference in the Rights Agreement to a “Rights Agent” shall be deemed to be a reference to AST.


 

	5.	 	Section 26 of the Rights Agreement is amended to provide that notices or demands shall be addressed as follows (until another address is filed):


 

	 If to the Company:
	  	 MILLIPORE CORPORATION

	 	  	 290 Concord Road

	 	  	 Billerica, MA 01821-3405

	 	  	 Attention: General Counsel

	
	 with a copy to:
	  	 David B. Walek

	 	  	 Ropes & Gray

	 	  	 One International Place

	 	  	 Boston, MA 02110-2624

	
	 If to AST:
	  	 American Stock Transfer & Trust Company

	 	  	 59 Maiden Lane

	 	  	 New York, NY 10038

	 	  	 Attention: Corporate Trust Department


 

	6.	 	Except as expressly modified herein, the Right Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

 

	7.	 	This Agreement of Substitution and Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall together constitute one and the same document.


 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the date first above written: 
 

	 MILLIPORE CORPORATION

	
	 By:
	 	 /s/    JEFFREY
RUDIN        


	 	 	 Jeffrey Rudin



 

	 AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER & TRUST
COMPANY

	
	 By:
	 	 /s/    HERBERT J.
LEMMER        


	 	 	 HERBERT J. LEMMER
 VICE PRESIDENT