alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT
            23**
 
 
 
 Consent
            of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 The
            Board
            of Directors and Shareholders
 MacDermid,
            Incorporated:
  We
            consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement
            (No.
            333-89185) on Form S-8 of MacDermid, Incorporated and subsidiaries of
            our
            reports dated March 10, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance
            sheets of
            MacDermid, Incorporated as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related
            consolidated statements of earnings and other comprehensive income, changes
            in
            shareholders’ equity, and cash flows, for each of the years in the three-year
            period ended December 31, 2005, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of
            internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and
            the
            effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December
            31,
            2005, which reports are incorporated by reference in the December 31,
            2005
            annual report on Form 10-K of MacDermid, Incorporated.
  /S/
            KPMG,LLP
  Denver,
            Colorado
 March
            10,
            2006
Exhibit 4.42 2014






Exhibit 4.42


Seadrill Management Ltd.              
Building 11, 2nd Floor
Chiswick Business Park
566 Chiswick High Road
London W4 5YS
Telephone +44 (0) 20 8811 4700




August 28, 2014






Seadrill Vencedor Ltd.
Par-la-Ville Place
14 Par-la-Ville Road
Hamilton HM08
Bermuda




		
	Re:
	Loan Agreement dated 28 September 2012 between Seadrill Limited and Seadrill Vencedor Ltd.  (the “Loan Agreement”)




To the Board of Directors of Seadrill Vencedor Ltd.




We refer to the above cited Loan Agreement which relates to the senior secured credit facility agreement dated 11 June 2010 which facility is secured by the drilling unit West Vencedor (the "Bank Facility").


This letter is to inform you that Seadrill Limited, as borrower, has elected to repay in full the amounts outstanding under the Bank Facility. Pursuant to the Loan Agreement, you are not obliged to repay the Loan Agreement at this time notwithstanding payment in full of the Bank Facility by Seadrill on a voluntary basis.


Pursuant to Clause 7.3 of the Loan Agreement, on behalf of Seadrill Limited you are hereby notified and instructed to continue making payments pursuant to the terms of the Loan Agreement, in the same amounts and at the same dates as specified in the Bank Facility and the Loan Agreement, as if the Bank Facility remained in place. Such payments should be made directly to Seadrill Limited, rather than to the agent bank.


All other terms of the Loan Agreement shall remain in force


Please acknowledge receipt and agreement with the terms set forth in this notice by signing and returning a copy of this letter to us.




Sincerely,






/s/ Rune Magnus Lundetrae
Rune Magnus Lundetrae
Chief Financial Officer
Seadrill Management Ltd.


Acknowledged and Agreed:
SEADRILL VENCEDOR LTD.





















By:                                                                                
Name:                                                                   
Title:                                                                     
                


Cc:   Mr. Graham Robjohns, CEO Seadrill Partners LLC



















































































































SCHEDULE 1


The Borrower (and, where relevant, the Borrower’s parent company or any intra-group charterer for the West Vencedor) shall grant the following security in favour of the Lender in respect of the West Vencedor:


		
	(a)
	a first priority perfected mortgage (including any deed of covenant); 




		
	(b)
	a share charge over all the shares of the Borrower;




		
	(c)
	an assignment of earnings;




		
	(d)
	an assignment of earnings accounts;




		
	(e)
	an assignment of insurances; and




		
	(f)
	any notices, filings or similar required to perfect the above.
#### Samuel G. Damon, appellee, v. City of Omaha et al., appellants.

Filed January 2, 1894.

No. 3492.

Heview: No briefs having been filed by either party, and the j udgment conforming to the pleadings and evidence, it is therefore affirmed. *Plienix Ins. Co. v. Beams,*37 Neb., 423, followed.

Appeal from -.the district court of Douglas county. Heard below before Wakeley, J.

*John L. Webster, A. J. Poppleton,*and *W. J. Connell,*for appellants.

*Charles B. Keller, contra.*

Irvine, C.

This was an appeal from a decree of the district court of Douglas county perpetually enjoining the defendants from working a street in that city to a grade alleged in the petition not to have been legally established, facts being alleged from which it would follow that plaintiff’s property abutting upon the street would be seriously injured, and it also being alleged that no lawful assessment or tender of damages had been made to plaintiff, and that no petition had been made for a change of grade.

No briefs have been filed on behalf of either party. We have examined the pleadings and the evidence; and as they are sufficient to support the judgment, it is accordingly

Affirmed.
2015.03.31 10-Q Exhibit 10.1






Exhibit 10.1
FOURTH AMENDMENT
to the 
Dover Corporation 
Deferred Compensation Plan 
(As Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2009)
WHEREAS, Dover Corporation (the “Corporation”) has heretofore adopted the Dover Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan, as amended and restated as of January 1, 2009 (the “Plan”); and
WHEREAS, the Benefits Committee of the Corporation (the “Benefits Committee”) is authorized to amend the Plan on behalf of the Corporation; and
WHEREAS, the Benefits Committee deems it advisable to amend the Plan in the manner set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT 
RESOLVED, that the Plan is hereby amended as follows:
Article 4 of the Plan is amended effective January 1, 2015 by adding the following at the end thereof: 


“A Participant who was transferred to a segment office from a discontinued operation after the beginning of the 2015 calendar year will be permitted to make a deferral election not later than March 31, 2015 with respect to the Bonus and the Cash-Based Long-Term Incentive Compensation for the 2015 year, provided that (i) such compensation meets the requirements of “performance-based compensation” as determined by the Committee, (ii) the Participant performs services continuously from the later of the beginning of the performance period or the date the criteria are established through the date the deferral election is submitted, and (iii) the compensation is not readily ascertainable as of the date the deferral election is filed.  “Performance-based compensation” means compensation where the amount of, or entitlement to, the compensation is contingent on the satisfaction of pre-established organizational or individual performance criteria relating to a performance period of at least twelve consecutive months.  Organizational or individual performance criteria are considered pre-established if established in writing not later than ninety (90) days after the commencement of the period of service to which the criteria relate, provided that the outcome is substantially uncertain at the time the criteria are established.  The determination of whether such compensation qualifies as "performance-based compensation" will be made in accordance with Treas. Reg. Section 1.409A-1(e) and subsequent guidance provided by the Internal Revenue Service.  A deferral election shall become irrevocable with respect to performance-based compensation as of the date the election is filed.  Any election to defer performance-based compensation that is made in accordance with this section and that becomes payable as a result of the Participant's death or Disability (as defined in Treas. Reg. Section 1.409A-l(e)) or upon a Change in Control (as defined in Treas. Reg. Section 1.409A-3(i)(5)) prior to the satisfaction of the performance criteria, will be void.”
#### § 96.11 Purpose and scope of subpart.

The regulations in this subpart and in 29 CFR part 99 implement Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations,” which was issued pursuant to The Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (Act). The Act builds upon earlier efforts to improve audits of Federal financial assistance programs. This subpart establishes uniform audit requirements and policy for recipients and subrecipients that receive Federal financial assistance from DOL.
#### § 501.31 Written notice of determination required.

Whenever the WHD Administrator decides to assess a civil money penalty, debar, increase a surety bond, or proceed administratively to enforce contractual obligations, or obligations under 8 U.S.C. 1188, 20 CFR part 655, subpart B, or this part, including for the recovery of the monetary relief, the person against whom such action is taken shall be notified in writing of such determination.
#### § 779.331 Meaning of sales “for resale.”

Except with respect to a specific situation regarding certain building materials, the word “resale” is not defined in the Act. The common meaning of “resale” is the act of “selling again.” A sale is made for resale where the seller knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the goods or services will be resold, whether in their original form, or in an altered form, or as a part, component or ingredient of another article. Where the goods or services are sold for resale, it does not matter what ultimately happens to such goods or services. Thus, the fact that the goods are consumed by fire or no market is found for them, and are, therefore, never resold does not alter the character of the sale which is made for resale. Similarly, if at the time the sale is made, the seller has no knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the goods are purchased for the purpose of resale, the fact that the goods later are actually resold is not controlling. In considering whether there is a sale of goods or services and whether such goods or services are sold for resale in any specific situation, the term “sale” includes, as defined in section 3(k) of the Act, “any sale, exchange, contract to sell, consignment for sale, shipment for sale, or other disposition.” Thus, under the definition sales by an establishment to a competitor are regarded as sales for resale even though made without profit. (*Northwestern-Hanna Fuel Co.* v. *McComb,* 166 F. 2d 932 (CA-8).) Similarly, sales for distribution by the purchaser for business purposes are sales for resale under the “other disposition” language of the definition of “sale” even though distributed at no cost to the ultimate recipient. (See *Mitchell* v. *Duplicate Photo Service,* 13 WH Cases 71, 31 L.C. Par. 70,287 (S.D. Cal. 1956) accord, *Mitchell* v. *Sherry Corine Corporation,* 264 F. 2d 831 (CA-4) (sale of meals to airlines for distribution to their passengers).) It should be noted, however, that occasional transfer of goods from the stock of one retail or service establishment to relieve a shortage in another such establishment under the same ownership will not be considered as sales for resale.
819 P.2d 107

#### Gail and Irene BEARD, husband and wife, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Frank HANNY dba Hanny Custom Farming, an individual, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 18781.

Supreme Court of Idaho, Idaho Falls,

September 1991 Term.

Oct. 24, 1991.

*690Jay A. Kohler, Idaho Falls, for defendant-appellant.

Steven W. Shaw, Pocatello, for plaintiffs-respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The appeal is dismissed because the order granting respondent’s preliminary injunction is not an appealable order as required by Idaho Appellate Rule 11.

Costs to respondents, no attorney fees awarded.
Order entered April 12, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-20-00801-CV

IN RE ALLSTATE FIRE AND CAS UALTY INSURANCE COMPANY AND LATINA FOSTER, Relators

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-20-00179-E

ORDER Before Justices Osborne, Reichek, and Smith

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, relators’ petition f or writ of

mandamus is DENIED

.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH JUSTICE
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 103 (Friday, May 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 34148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13320]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

Application for Duty-Free Entry of Scientific Instrument

    Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Educational, Scientific and 
Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 (Pub. L. 89-651; 80 Stat. 
897; 15 CFR part 301), we invite comments on the question of whether an 
instrument of equivalent scientific value, for the purposes for which 
the instrument shown below is intended to be used, is being 
manufactured in the United States.
    Comments must comply with 15 CFR 301.5(a)(3) and (4) of the 
regulations and be filed within 20 days with the Statutory Import 
Programs Staff, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230. 
Applications may be examined between 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. in Room 4211, 
U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., 
Washington, DC.
    Docket Number: 00-010. Applicant: Tulane University, 6823 St. 
Charles Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70118-5698. Instrument: Electron 
Microscope, Model JEM-2010. Manufacturer: JEOL Ltd., Japan. Intended 
Use: The instrument is intended to be used for the study of 
microstructure of metals, metal oxide fibers, ceramics, semiconductors, 
composite materials, and geological samples. In these studies, the 
microscope is used to measure particle and crystal sizes and 
morphologies, crystalline structure and d-spacing of crystallographic 
planes, chemical composition and distribution, and number and extent of 
defects. In addition, the instrument will be used to train graduate 
students so that they will better understand the microscopy analysis of 
their samples. Application accepted by Commissioner of Customs: April 
12, 2000.

Frank W. Creel,
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff.
[FR Doc. 00-13320 Filed 5-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```
In The Matter Of: 

SERVED: JANUARY 19, 2016 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

Docket No. FAA-2015-0635 

HORTMAN AVIATION 

SERVICES, INC. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 2010EA170043 

Respondent 

ORDER GRANTING TEMPORARY STAY 

OF PROCEEDINGS NUNC PRO TUNC 

On December 29,2015, an Order Granting FAA Motion for Extension of Time was filed. 

This Order extended the FAA's deadline to file a Motion for Default from December 31, 2015 to 

January 15, 2016. 

On January 15,2016, the FAA filed the Agency's Request for 60-Day Stay of 

Proceedings, citing multiple grounds. 

Pursuant to 14 C.P.R. § 13.205(a)(8), and after reviewing all relevant caselaw, 

regulations, statutory authority, and being fully advised; 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

1. The FAA's Motion for a temporary Stay of Proceedings for 60 days is granted, nunc pro 

tunc, from January 15,2016 to March 15, 2016. 

2. On or before March 25, 2016, the FAA should file a Motion for Default, a Case Status 

Report, or a Withdrawal of the Complaint. 

Attachment: Service List 
Docket No. FAA-2015-0635 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 0001 

Mr. Zachary M. Berman 

Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Chief Counsel 

Enforcement Division, Northeast Team 

1 Aviation Plaza 

Jamaica, NY 11434 

TEL: 718-553-3258 

FAJ(: 718-995-5699 

Mr. H.M. Hortman, President 

Hortman Aviation Services, Inc. 

Respondent 

9800 Ashton Road 

Philadelphia, P A 19114 

TEL: 215-969-0311 

FAJ(: 215-677-6408 

Judge J .E. Sullivan 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

ONE COPY 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (E11-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAJ(: 202-366-7536 

1 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.
#### § 778.600 Veterans' subsistence allowances.

Subsistence allowances paid under Public Law 346 (commonly known as the G.I. bill of rights) to a veteran employed in on-the-job training program work may not be used to offset the wages to which he is entitled under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The subsistence allowances provided by Public Law 346 for payment to veterans are not paid as compensation for services rendered to an employer nor are they intended as subsidy payments for such employer. In order to qualify as wages under either section 6 or section 7 of the Act, sums paid to an employee must be paid by or on behalf of the employer. Since veterans' subsistence allowances are not so paid, they may not be used to make up the minimum wage or overtime pay requirements of the Act nor are they included in the regular rate of pay under section 7.
EXHIBIT 32



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 Amendment No. 5 of Big Sky Energy Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Selami Ahmet Sehsuvaroglu, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







Date:  December 16, 2005

By: /s/ Selami Ahmet Sehsuvaroglu

Name:  Selami Ahmet Sehsuvaroglu

Title:   Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Interior

###### Bureau of Land Management 

          - [NV-020-00-0777-XX] 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting location and time for the Sierra Front/Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council (Nevada). 

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and the Federal Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (FACA), a meeting of the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Sierra Front/Northwestern Great Basin Resource Advisory Council (Nevada) will be held as indicated below. The topic of discussion will be a review of the Black Rock Management Plan being prepared by the Winnemucca Field Office, and other topics the council may raise.

The meetings is open to the public. The public may present written and/or comments to the council. The public comment period for the council meeting will be at 4:00 p.m. on Wednesday, June 14th. Individuals who plan to attend and need special assistance such as sign language interpretation or other reasonable accommodations, or who desire a hard copy of the agenda, should contact Mike Holbert, Winnemucca Field Office, 5100 East Winnemucca Blvd., Winnemucca, NV 89445, telephone (775) 623-1514 no later than June 10, 2000.

# DATES:

The council will meet on Wednesday, June 14, 2000, from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at the Best Western Inn-Fernley, 1405 East Newlands Drive, Fernley, Nevada. Public comment on individual topics will be received at the discretion of the Council Chairperson, as meeting moderator, with a general public comment period on Wednesday, June 14, 2000, at 4:00 p.m.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mike Holbert, Associate Field Manager, Winnemucca Field Office, 5100 East Winnemucca Blvd., Winnemucca, NV 89445. Telephone (775) 623-1514.

Dated: May 12, 2000. 

Michael R. Holbert, 

Associate Field Manager, Winnemucca Field Office. 

[FR Doc. 00-13165 Filed 5-24-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
#### SOINSKI v WARDASZKO

Ohio Appeals, 6th Dist., Lucas Co

No 2368.

Decided May 26, 1930

Christensen & Christensen and Pierre Chase, all of Toledo, for Soinski.

Joseph G. Gluck, Toledo, for Wardaszko.

WILLIAMS, J.

Section 15, Article I of the Constitution of *427Ohio forbids imprisonment for debt in a civil action except in cases of fraud. Under 11725 GC, an execution against the person of a debtor may be issued on a judgment for the payment of money when he fraudulently incurred the obligation upon which the judgment was rendered. The holdings of the courts have been uniform that where a man, under promise of marriage, seduces a woman and the seduction is brought about by means of the promise of marriage, and he then breaks his promise and abandons her, his action constitutes a fraud in the eye of the law.

> In the matter of Daniel Sheahan, 25 Mich., 145;

> Mood vs. Sudderth, 111 N. C., 215;

> Perry vs. Orr, 35 N. J. L., 295;

> Polhemus vs. Melides, 96 N. J. L., 105;

> 5 C. J., Subject—Arrest, Secs. 83, 96, 113;

> 4 R. C. L., 154, Sec. 12.

See also the following annotations:

> 34 L. R. A., 639;

> 59 L. R. A., 957.

We have no difficulty in reaching the conclusion that the facts set forth in the motion for the allowance of execution against the person of the defendant, filed by the defendant, and sworn to by her, constituted a charge of fraud within the meaning of 11745 GC. The court below, therefore, could not lawfully discharge the defendant from custody without a hearing as to the truth of the charges upon evidence after arrest was made, and in discharging defendant the court erred to the prejudice of the plaintiff in error.

The judgment of the court below will therefore be reversed and the cause remand ifor further proceedings according to law.

Lloyd and Richards, JJ., concur.
#### § 779.409 Handicapped workers.

Regulations have been issued under the authority in section 14 of the Act to provide for employment under special certificate of handicapped workers at wages lower than the minimum wage applicable under section 6 of the Act. These regulations are set forth in part 524 of this chapter. In these regulations handicapped workers are defined as individuals whose earning capacity is impaired by age or physical or mental deficiency or injury for the work they are to perform.