alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Elof MALM, Appellee, v. UNITED STATES LINES COMPANY, Appellant.

No. 489, Docket 31199.

United States Court of Appeals Second Circuit.

Argued May 31, 1967.

Decided June 5, 1967.

Daniel J. Dougherty, New York City (Charles N. Fiddler, Kirlin Campbell & Keating, New York City, of counsel), for appellant.

Thomas E. P. McElligott, Fields, Rosen, McElligott & Auslander, New York City, for appellee.

Before WATERMAN, SMITH and KAUFMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

We affirm on the basis of Judge Weinfeld’s opinion in the District Court, reported at 269 F.Supp. 731 (S.D.N.Y. 1967).1

1

. Since neither party on appeal raised the issue of maintenance and cure, we have not considered that portion of Judge Weinfeld’s opinion.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 888 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 89
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 888

  To amend section 1091 of title 18, United States Code, to allow the 
         prosecution of genocide in appropriate circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 15, 2007

    Mr. Durbin (for himself, Mr. Coburn, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. 
  Feingold, and Mr. Kennedy) introduced the following bill; which was 
       read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

                             March 26, 2007

                Reported by Mr. Leahy, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend section 1091 of title 18, United States Code, to allow the 
         prosecution of genocide in appropriate circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Genocide Accountability Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. GENOCIDE.

    Section 1091 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
striking subsection (d) and inserting the following:
    ``(d) Required Circumstance for Offenses.--The circumstance 
referred to in subsections (a) and (c) is that--
            ``(1) the offense is committed in whole or in part within 
        the United States;
            ``(2) the alleged offender is a national of the United 
        States (as that term is defined in section 101 of the 
        Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101));
            ``(3) the alleged offender is an alien lawfully admitted 
        for permanent residence in the United States (as that term is 
        defined in section 101 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 
        (8 U.S.C. 1101));
            ``(4) the alleged offender is a stateless person whose 
        habitual residence is in the United States; or
            ``(5) after the conduct required for the offense occurs, 
        the alleged offender is brought into, or found in, the United 
        States, even if that conduct occurred outside the United 
        States.''.
                                                        Calendar No. 89

110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 888

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend section 1091 of title 18, United States Code, to allow the 
         prosecution of genocide in appropriate circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 26, 2007

                       Reported without amendment
```
<PAGE>1
Exhibit 32 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
           pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350


CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Citizens First
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report") I, Mary D. Cohron, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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.

By:  /s/Mary D. Cohron
        Mary D. Cohron
       Chief Executive Officer



Date:  September 5, 2006

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Citizens First
Corporation (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report") I, Steve Marcum, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(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.




By:  /s/ Steve Marcum
         Steve Marcum
         Chief Financial Officer


Date: September 5, 2006
                                              1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                       UT
<MULTIPLIER>                    1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                      452,165
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     24,265
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         133,383
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                        79,582
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 689,395
<COMMON>                                        19,423
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                       37,188
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            184,232
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 240,843
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,960
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                           179,346
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                  59,600
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        0
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 207,646
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                  689,395
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      544,816
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                            17,348
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     481,073
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     498,421
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         46,395
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               4,376
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  50,771
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        17,947
<NET-INCOME>                                    32,824
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         97
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   32,727
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                        22,079
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                       13,939
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          41,267
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.87
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.87

<FN>
Capital surplus, paid in includes $(24,017) treasury stock.
                            
                                   77
        

</TABLE>
Air Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

APPENDIX A SCAQMD Network DepictionsAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 1 Figure 1 SCAQMD Ozone Monitoring LocationsAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 2 Figure 2 SCAQMD PM10 Monitoring LocationsAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 3 Figure 3 SCAQMD Monitoring Locations for Nitrogen DioxideAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 4 Figure 4 SCAQMD Monitoring Locations for Carbon MonoxideAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 5 Figure 5 SCAQMD Monitoring Loc ations for Sulfur DioxideAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 6 Figure 6 SCAQMD Source and Ambient Particulate Lead Monitoring LocationsAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 7 Figure 7 SCAQMD PAMS Monitoring LocationsAir Quality Monitoring Network Plan
– July 2013

A - 8 Figure 8 SCAQMD PM2.5 Monitoring Locations B = BAM FEM B1 = BAM
exv10w10





EXHIBIT 10.10




Mindspeed Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) has entered into an agreement with each of the
following persons, which is substantially identical, except as set forth below, to the form of
Employment Agreement filed as Exhibit 10.9 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.



Najabat H. Bajwa




Kurt F. Busch




Ron Cates




Jing Cao




Raouf Y. Halim




Gerald J. Hamilton




Bret W. Johnsen




Anil S. Mankar




Thomas J. Medrek




The multiple set forth in Section 6(i)(B) of the Employment Agreement for Mr. Halim is three and
the multiple set forth in Section 6(i)(B) of the Employment Agreement for the other persons is two.
#### DAVIS v ELYRIA (city)

Ohio Appeals, 9th Dist, Lorain Co

No 521.

Decided April 30, 1930

F. M. Stevens, Elyria, Cyril J. Maple, Elyria and Frank E. Stevens, Cleveland, for Davis.

Harry M. Redington, City Solicitor, Elyria, for City.

PARDEE, J.

At the outset we are unfortunately confronted with the fact that a copy of the ordinance was not made a part of the record, so we cannot properly consider the questions raised by the attorneys for the plaintiff in error;.and, there being no other question presented for our consideration, the judgment of the Common Pleas Court will have to be affirmed.

The bill of exceptions has attached to it what purports to be a copy of the ordinance, but the ordinance was not offered in evidence in the trial court, and reference is not made to it in the evidence, as disclosed by the bill of exceptions, and the mayor did not certify that it is a part of the bill of exceptions; therefore it is not a. part of the record and cannot properly bé considere^ by this court in a review of the case.

This holding is in accordance with the prior holdings of this court and of many other Ohio courts, some of which are as follows:

> City of Elyria v. Laemonouz, and City of Elyria v. Halli, Nos. 225 and 226, respectively, Lorain Co. Court of Appeals decided by this court Feb. 16, 1923.

> Sours v. City of Akron No. 493, Summit Co. Court of Appeals, decided by *359this court Nov. 11, 1921.

> Esch v. Elyria, 27 O. C. C. 446, 7 O. C. C. (N. S.) 9.

> Evans v. Wooster, 28 O. C. A. 285, 30 C. D. 251.

> Nelson v. Berea, 12 C. D. 329, 21 O. C. C. 781; affirmed, 66 OS. 668.

> Grossner v. State, 18 C. C. (N. S.) 46, 36 C. D. 587.

> Lutkehaus v. Mt. Healthy, 11 C. C. (N. S.) 536, 21 C. D. 281.

> Toledo v. Libbie, 19 O. C. C. 704; affirmed, 51 OS. 562.

> Levine v. Cleveland, No. 2411, Cuyahoga Co., Unreported Decisions 8th Dist. Court of Appeals, Vol. 17, p. 21.

> Gates v. Cleveland, 18 C. C. (N. S.) 349.

Funk, PJ., and Washburn, J., concur.
#### §§ 2205.161-2205.169 [Reserved]
#### STATE ex BRICKELL v ROACH, Rec’r et

Ohio Supreme Court

No 22011.

Decided March 19, 1930
#### § 2580.412-7 Statutory provision—scope of the bond.

The statute requires that the bond shall provide protection to the plan against loss by reason of acts of fraud or dishonesty on the part of a plan administrator, officer, or employee, directly or through connivance with others.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4837 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4837

        To repeal the Alien Enemies Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

             October 21 (legislative day, October 19), 2020

   Ms. Hirono (for herself, Mr. Sanders, Mr. Markey, and Mr. Booker) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
        To repeal the Alien Enemies Act, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Neighbors Not Enemies Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF ALIEN ENEMIES ACT.

    Sections 4067 through 4070 of the Revised Statutes of the United 
States (50 U.S.C. 21-24) are repealed.
                                 <all>
```
§ 1614.101 General policy. ( a ) It is the policy of the Government of the United States to provide equal opportunity in employment for all persons, to prohibit discrimination in employment because of race; color; religion; sex; national origin; age; disability; genetic information; or pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions; and to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each agency.
( b ) No person shall be subject to retaliation for opposing any practice made unlawful by title VII of the Civil Rights Act (title VII) (42 U.S.C. 2000e *et seq.*), the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) (29 U.S.C. 621 *et seq.*), the Equal Pay Act (29 U.S.C. 206(d)), the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 791 *et seq.*), the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA) (42 U.S.C. 2000ff *et seq.*), or the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) (42 U.S.C. 2000gg *et seq.*) or for participating in any stage of administrative or judicial proceedings under those statutes.
[89 FR 11171, Feb. 14, 2024]
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT 

THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT (this “Second Amendment”), dated as of March 27, 2015 (the
“Effective Date”), is made and entered into by and between SYCAMORE NETWORKS, INC. (the “Seller”) and PRINCETON TYNGSBORO COMMONS LLC (the “Buyer”). 

RECITALS 
 A. Seller and Buyer
are parties to that certain Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of October 10, 2014 (the “Original Purchase Agreement”), as amended by that certain First Amendment to Purchase and Sale Agreement dated as of
February 24, 2015 (the “First Amendment”; the Original Purchase Agreement and the First Amendment, together, the “Purchase Agreement”) wherein the Buyer has agreed to purchase and Seller has
agreed to sell that certain property consisting of 102.3 acres, more or less, located off Westford Road, Tyngsborough, Massachusetts as more particularly described in the Purchase Agreement, as well as the Supplemental Escrow Agreement dated
October 14, 2014 regarding the Escrow Agent’s duties regarding deposits. 
 B. The time of the performance and delivery of the
Deed for the transaction contemplated by the Purchase Agreement, as affected by that certain letter dated December 31, 2014 from the Buyer to the Seller and the First Amendment, is presently scheduled to take place on March 27, 2015 (the
“Current Closing Date”). 
 C. Seller and Buyer wish to extend the time of performance of the transaction
contemplated by the Purchase Agreement. 
 AGREEMENT: 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the sum of Ten Dollars and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged and confessed, Seller and Buyer hereby agree as follows: 
 1. Extended Time of
Performance. 
 The time of performance and delivery of the Deed for the transaction contemplated by the Purchase Agreement is
hereby extended from the Current Closing Date to March 30, 2015. 
 2. Ratification. Except as amended by this Second
Amendment, all other terms, conditions, covenants and provisions as appear in the Purchase Agreement and the Supplemental Escrow Agreement are hereby ratified and confirmed and shall remain unchanged. 

[REMAINDER OF PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Second Amendment to be duly executed under seal
as of the date first written above. 
  

					
	SELLER:
	
	SYCAMORE NETWORKS, INC.
		
	BY:		 /s/ David Guerrera

	TITLE: 		President and General Counsel
	
	BUYER:
	
	PRINCETON TYNGSBOROUGH COMMONS LLC
		
	BY:		Princeton MGR Inc., its Manager
			
			BY:		 /s/ Terry Flahive

			TITLE: 		Vice President
			As duly authorized and not individually
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

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 accompanying Annual Report of Kewaunee Scientific Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended April 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, William A. Shumaker, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| | (1) | such Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended April 30, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
78m or 78o(d)); and
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | the information contained in such Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended April 30, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: July 12, 2006



/S/    WILLIAM A. SHUMAKERWilliam A. Shumaker President and Chief Executive Officer
Editorial Note on Part 20
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 20 appear at 57 FR 31451, July 16, 1992.

§ 20.108 Agency review of the obligation. ( a ) The individual responsible for collection of the debt will consider any evidence submitted by the debtor as a result of the notification required by § 20.107(b) and notify the debtor of the result. If appropriate, the debtor will also be advised where and to whom to request a review of any unresolved dispute.
( b ) The debtor will be granted at least 30 days from the date of the notification required by paragraph (a) of this section to request a review of the determination of the individual responsible for collection of the debt on any unresolved dispute. The debtor will be advised of the result.
( c ) The review required by paragraph (b) of this section will ordinarily be based on written submissions and documentation provided by the debtor. However, a reasonable opportunity for an oral hearing will be provided the debtor when the reviewing official determines that any remaining dispute cannot be resolved by review of the documentary evidence alone. Unless otherwise required by law, an oral hearing under this section is not required to be a formal evidentiary-type hearing, although the reviewing official should carefully document all significant matters discussed at the hearing.
§ 1960.46 Agency responsibility. ( a ) The head of each agency shall establish procedures to assure that no employee is subject to restraint, interference, coercion, discrimination or reprisal for filing a report of an unsafe or unhealthful working condition, or other participation in agency occupational safety and health program activities, or because of the exercise by such employee on behalf of himself or herself or others of any right afforded by section 19 of the Act, Executive Order 12196, or this part. These rights include, among other, the right of an employee to decline to perform his or her assigned task because of a reasonable belief that, under the circumstances the task poses an imminent risk of death or serious bodily harm coupled with a reasonable belief that there is insufficient time to seek effective redress through normal hazard reporting and abatement procedures established in accordance with this part.
( b ) Based on the Secretary's evaluation of agencies' procedures for protecting employees from reprisal, the Secretary shall report to the President by September 30, 1982 his findings and recommendations for improvements in procedures for the investigation and resolution of allegations of reprisal.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 852 

To deauthorize the project for navigation, Tenants Harbor, Maine. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 13, 2007 

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To deauthorize the project for navigation, Tenants Harbor, 

Maine. 

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

3 SECTION 1. TENANTS HARBOR, MAINE. 

4 The project for navigation, Tenants Harbor, Maine, 

5 authorized by the first section of the Act of March 2, 1919 

6 (40 Stat. 1275, chapter 95), is not authorized after the 

7 date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS