alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.1

                          ANNUAL SERVICER'S CERTIFICATE
                            METRIS RECEIVABLES, INC.
                               METRIS MASTER TRUST

         The undersigned,  a duly authorized  representative of Direct Merchants
Credit Card Bank, National Association,  as Servicer pursuant to the Pooling and
Servicing  Agreement  dated as of May 26, 1995,  amended and  restated  July 30,
1998, as amended (the "Pooling and  Servicing  Agreement"),  by and among Metris
Receivables,  Inc.  (the  "Transferor"),  Direct  Merchants  Credit  Card  Bank,
National  Association,  as  Servicer  and The  Bank of New York  (Delaware),  as
trustee (the "Trustee") does hereby certify that:

         1. Direct Merchants Credit Card Bank, National Association, is Servicer
under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement.

         2. The  undersigned  is duly  authorized  pursuant  to the  Pooling and
Servicing Agreement to execute and deliver this Certificate to the Trustee.

         3. This Certificate is delivered pursuant to Section 3.5 of the Pooling
and Servicing Agreement.

         4. A review of the  activities  of the Servicer  during the period from
January 1, 1998 until December 31, 1998 was conducted under my supervision.

         5. Based on such review, the Servicer has, to the best of my knowledge,
fully performed all of its obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement
throughout such period and no default in the performance of such obligations has
occurred or is continuing except as set forth in paragraph 6 below.

         6. The following is a description of each default in the performance of
the  Servicer's  obligations  under the  provisions of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement,  including any Supplement,  known to me to have been made during such
period which sets forth in detail (i) the nature of each such default,  (ii) the
action taken by the Servicer,  if any, to remedy each such default and (iii) the
current status of each such default:

                  None.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the undersigned has duly executed this certificate
on March 12, 1999.

                                            DIRECT MERCHANTS CREDIT CARD BANK,
                                            NATIONAL ASSOCIATION


                                            /s/ Jean Benson
                                            Name:    Jean Benson
                                            Title:   Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 8**

 

**Subsidiaries**

 

The following are the subsidiaries of Triple PN.V., each of which is a wholly-owned subsidiary directly or indirectly of theCompany:

 
| **Name**                               |   | **Legal Seat**            |
|----------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------|
|                                   |   |                      |
| *Active*                               |   |                      |
|                                   |   |                      |
| Triple P Management B.V.               |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Triple P Nederland B.V.                |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Triple P eActivity B.V.                |   | Zeist - The Netherlands   |
| Mediasystemen B.V.                     |   | Haarlem - The Netherlands |
|                                   |   |                      |
| *Inactive*                             |   |                      |
|                                   |   |                      |
| Triple P Services / B-Catel  B.V.      |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Triple P Healthcare B.V.               |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Telesystems Europe B.V.                |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Triple P Intellectual  Properties B.V. |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Triple P Lab Info Systems  B.V.        |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| F.W. Salomons Holding B.V.             |   | Vianen - The Netherlands  |
| Omega N.V./S.A.                        |   | Mechelen  - Belgium       |

 

----
Exhibit 10.3


 


LGL
Systems Acquisition Corp.


165
W. Liberty St., Suite 220


Reno,
NV 89501


 


November
6, 2019


 


LGL
Systems Nevada Management Partners LLC


165
W. Liberty St., Suite 220


Reno,
NV 89501


 


Ladies
and Gentlemen:


 


This
letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective date (the “Effective Date”) of the
registration statement (the “Registration Statement”) for the initial public offering (the “IPO”)
of the securities of LGL Systems Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) and continuing until the earlier
of (i) the consummation by the Company of an initial business combination or (ii) the Company’s liquidation (in each case
as described in the Registration Statement) (such earlier date hereinafter referred to as the “Termination Date”),
LGL Systems Nevada Management Partners LLC (the “Affiliate”) shall make available to the Company certain
office space, utilities and secretarial support as may be required by the Company from time to time, situated at 165 W. Liberty
St., Suite 220, Reno, NV 89501 (or any successor location). In exchange therefore, the Company shall pay the Affiliate the sum
of $10,000 per month on the Effective Date and continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date; provide, however, that
the Company may delay payment of such monthly fee upon a determination by the audit committee of the board of directors of the
Company that the Company lacks sufficient funds held outside of the Trust Account to pay actual or anticipated expenses in connection
with an initial business combination. Any such unpaid amount shall accrue without interest and either be due and payable no later
than the date of the Company’s initial business combination or at the Affiliate’s option, treated as working capital
loans and be convertible into warrants on terms identical to the private warrants (subject to the $1,500,000 maximum amount of
working capital loans convertible to warrants as described in Prospectus). If the Company does not consummate an initial business
combination, any accrued and unpaid amounts hereunder shall be forgiven. The Affiliate hereby agrees that it does not have any
right, title, interest or claim of any kind in or to any monies that may be set aside in a trust account (the “Trust
Account”) to be established upon the consummation of the IPO (the “Claim”) and hereby
waives any Claim it may have in the future as a result of, or arising out of, any negotiations, contracts or agreements with the
Company and will not seek recourse against the Trust Account for any reason whatsoever.


 


[Signature
Page Follows]


 






    


     


    

 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 	 
	 	LGL SYSTEMS ACQUISITION CORP.
	 	 	 
	 	By:	 
	 	 	Name:  
	 	 	Title:    


 


AGREED
TO AND ACCEPTED BY:


 


	LGL SYSTEMS NEVADA MANAGEMENT PARTNERS LLC	 
	 	 	 
	By:	 	 
	 	Name:  	 
	 	Title:
§ 3010.126 Subscription. ( a ) Each document filed with the Commission shall be subscribed. Subscription constitutes a certification that the person filing the document has read the document being filed; that the person filing the document knows the contents thereof; that if executed in any representative capacity, the document has been subscribed in the capacity specified in the document with full power and authority so to do; that to the best of the person's knowledge, information and belief every statement contained in the document is true and no such statements are misleading; and that such document is not filed for purposes of delay. This requirement extends to notices of filing for library references or other material, including the underlying library references or other material to the extent referenced in the notice of filing.
( b ) For a document or notice of filing filed via the Filing Online system, the subscription requirement is met when the document or notice of filing is filed with the Commission.
( c ) For a hardcopy document or hardcopy notice of filing, the subscription requirement is met by signing in ink, by affixing an electronic signature, or by including the typed name of the individual, authorized office, employee, attorney, or other representative who files the document or notice.
#### § 167.155 Off New York: Southern approach.

(a) A separation zone is established bounded by a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 39°45.70′ N | 73°48.00′ W |
| 40°20.63′ N | 73°48.33′ W |
| 40°20.87′ N | 73°47.07′ W |
| 39°45.70′ N | 73°44.00′ W |

(b) A traffic lane for northbound traffic is established between the separation zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 39°45.70′ N | 73°37.70′ W |
| 40°21.25′ N | 73°45.85′ W |

(c) A traffic lane for southbound traffic is established between the separation zone and a line connecting the following geographical positions:

| Latitude | Longitude |
| --- | --- |
| 40°20.53′ N | 73°49.65′ W |
| 39°45.70′ N | 73°54.40′ W |

[CGD 84-004, 52 FR 33589, Sept. 4, 1987, as amended by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36287, June 25, 2010]
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10377

Conference Calendar

__________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

RONALD EARL GREEN,

 Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:93-CR-204-D

- - - - - - - - - -

(October 19, 1995)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Ronald Earl Green argues that the disparity in the penalty

provisions and sentencing guidelines applicable to crack cocaine

and cocaine powder violates his equal protection and due process

rights and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the

Eighth Amendment. The disparate sentencing provisions for crack

cocaine and cocaine powder in the sentencing guidelines do not

violate constitutional due process guarantees. See United States
No. 95-10377

-2-

v. Watson, 953 F.2d 895, 897 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 504 U.S.

928 (1992). We have rejected the argument that the guidelines

applicable to crack cocaine violate equal protection because they

have a discriminatory effect on African-Americans. Id. at 897-

98. We also have rejected an Eighth Amendment challenge to the

disparity of the penalties imposed for crack cocaine. See United

States v. Fisher, 22 F.3d 574, 579-80 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,

115 S. Ct. 529 (1994).

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT C

Case 1:22-mc-23919-DPG Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2022 Page 1 of 3
1 

Declaration of Christina Baugh 

 I, Christina Baugh, pursuant to 28 USC § 1746, hereby declare as follows: 

1. I am counsel of record for GOLO, LLC (“GOLO”) in the case styled GOLO, LLC v. Goli 

Nutrition, Inc., et al., pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, C.A. 

No. 20-667-RGA (the “Delaware Action”). In that role, I have participated in discussions with 

counsel for third-party Alexander Rodriguez regarding two subpoenas served on him in the 

Delaware Action. 

2. On October 11, 2022, I reached out to counsel for Mr. Rodriguez, David Koche, Esq., to 

see if he would accept service on behalf of Mr. Rodriguez. On October 13, 2022, after I followed 

up, Mr. Koche agreed to accept service. Attached hereto as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of 

my email communication with David Koche, Esq. 

3. On October 26, 2022, Benjamin Levine, Esq., reached out to me as counsel for Mr. 

Rodriguez and asked to set a time for us to connect. After exchanging emails to schedule a time, 

we had a telephone conference on November 2, 2022 at 4:00 pm, in which counsel for Mr. 

Rodriguez expressed concerns with the Subpoenas. As promised in follow up, I sent counsel an 

email on November 8, 2022 offering to narrow the scope of the subpoena for documents to address 

Mr. Rodriguez’s concerns relating to burden, particularly relating to documents in Goli’s 

possession or in the public realm. A true and correct copy of the email communication is attached 

hereto as Exhibit 2. 

4. On November 10, 2022, counsel for Mr. Rodriguez responded and set forth objections in 

writing for the first time. A true and correct copy of the correspondence is attached hereto as 

Exhibit 3. 

Case 1:22-mc-23919-DPG Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2022 Page 2 of 3
2 

5. Mr. Rodriguez has not produced any documents in response to the subpoena for documents 

and has not sat for his deposition. 

I, Christina Baugh, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of 

America that the foregoing is true and correct. 

This 1st day of December, 2022. 

 

Christina Baugh 

Case 1:22-mc-23919-DPG Document 1-3 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/01/2022 Page 3 of 3
**EXHIBIT24.4****POWER OF ATTORNEY**     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Mark A.Kopser and John J. Wellik, and each of them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full powerof substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on hisbehalf, as a director or officer, or both, as the case may be, of United Surgical PartnersInternational, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), the Corporation’s Annual Report onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, and to sign any or all amendments to such Form10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith,with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and each of themwith or without the others, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thingrequisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposesas he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of saidattorneys-in-fact or its substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtuehereof.                                                            /s/ John C. Garrett, M.D.   John C. Garrett, M.D.
§ 102-38.195 Must bidders use authorized bid forms? Cross Reference
Link to an amendment published at 89 FR 67866 , Aug. 22, 2024.
No, bidders do not have to use authorized bid forms; however if a bidder uses his/her own bid form to submit a bid, the bid may be considered only if— ( a ) The bidder accepts all the terms and conditions of the offer to sell; and
( b ) Award of the bid would result in a binding contract.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sunbeam Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Jerry
W. Levin, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and John W. Frederick, Senior
Vice President of Finance and Corporate Controller (Principal Financial Officer)
of the Company, each certifies, 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.



/s/ Jerry W. Levin


Jerry W. Levin
Chief Executive Officer
November 19, 2002




/s/ John W. Frederick


John W. Frederick
Senior Vice President of Finance and Corporate Controller
(Principal Financial Officer)
November 19, 2002
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–011 2009

111th Congress, 1st Session – – – – – – – – – – – – – House Document 111–49 

REPORT TO THE CONGRESS CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF WAIVER AUTHORITY FOR 

TURKMENISTAN 

COMMUNICATION 

FROM

THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY LEGISLATIVE 

AFFAIRS, THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

TRANSMITTING

A REPORT CONCERNING THE EXTENSION OF WAIVER AUTHORITY 

FOR TURKMENISTAN, PURSUANT TO PUB. L. 93–618, SUBSECTION 402(d)(1) and 409 

JUNE 15, 2009.—Referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and 

ordered to be printed 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTSE:\Seals\Congress.#13

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
(1) 

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Washington, DC, June 3, 2009. 

Hon. NANCY PELOSI, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives 

DEAR MADAM SPEAKER: Pursuant to subsection 402(d)(1) and 409 

of the Trade Act of 1974 (JacksonVanik Amendment), P.L. 93–618, 

the President’s Delegation of Authority E.O. 13346 (July 8, 2004), 

and Department of State Delegation of Authority No. 245–1 (February 13, 2009), the Deputy Secretary of State for Management 

and Resources has exercised the waiver authority provided by the 

Act on behalf of the Secretary of State and has issued the required 

determination. 

A copy of the Deputy Secretary’s Determination and the accompanying Report to Congress concerning the extension of waiver authority for Turkmenistan are enclosed. 

We hope you find this information useful. Please do not hesitate 

to contact us if we may be of assistance on this or any other issue. 

Sincerely, 

RICHARD R. VERMA, 

Assistant Secretary, 

Legislative Affairs. 

Enclosure: As stated. 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS

smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTS
(3) 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTSInsert offset folio 3 here HD49.001
4 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTSInsert offset folio 4 here HD49.002
5 


smartinez on PROD1PC64 with REPORTSInsert offset folio 5 here HD49.003
EXHIBIT 32.1







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

     The undersigned, Francis R. Biscan Jr., Chief Executive Officer of
American Stellar Energy Inc. (Formerly Merchantpark Communications Inc.). (the
"Company"), does hereby 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 Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended
December 31, 2004 (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.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 14
day of December 2005.

                                   By:  /s/ Francis R. Biscan Jr.
                                         --------------------------------
                                         Francis R. Biscan Jr.
                                         Chief Executive Officer
#### § 102-40.65 Who is responsible for the custody of hazardous materials and property requiring special handling?

The holding agency is responsible for the custody of hazardous materials and property requiring special handling. Custody of these items may be transferred in whole or in part to another Federal agency with that receiving agency's consent.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7107

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KENNETH LEE FOSTER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at 

Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, District Judge. (1:09-cr-00013-MR-WCM-8; 1:12-cv00315-MR)

Submitted: December 17, 2019 Decided: December 20, 2019

Before KING, FLOYD, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kenneth Lee Foster, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Kenneth Lee Foster seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 60(d) motion seeking to set aside the judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) 

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies 

this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s 

assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 

473, 484 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003). When the district 

court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the 

dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of 

the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Foster has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Foster’s motion for a certificate of 

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

MIAMI DIVISION

CASE NO. 1:22-cv-23753-KMM

EDWIN GARRISON, et al., 

Plaintiffs,

v. 

SAM BANKMAN-FRIED, et al., 

Defendants.

_________________________________________/ 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

Brandon S. Floch, Esq., of Marcus Neiman Rashbaum & Pineiro LLP, hereby enters his 

appearance as counsel on behalf of Solomid Corporation in the above-captioned matter and 

respectfully requests that copies of all future pleadings, orders, and other papers be provided to the 

undersigned.

Date: June 6, 2023

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Brandon S. Floch

Brandon S. Floch

Florida Bar No. 125218

MARCUS NEIMAN RASHBAUM & 

PINEIRO LLP 

2 S. Biscayne Blvd. Ste. 2530

Miami, FL 33131

Telephone: (305) 400-4260

bfloch@mnrlawfirm.com 

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 221 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/06/2023 Page 1 of 2
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 6, 2023, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of 

Appearance was served via CM/ECF on all counsel or parties of record on the Service List

By: /s/ Brandon S. Floch

Brandon S. Floch

Case 1:22-cv-23753-KMM Document 221 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/06/2023 Page 2 of 2
#### § 102-38.305 How do we handle disputes involved in the sale of Federal personal property?

First contact your Office of General Counsel. Further guidance can be found in the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, as amended (41 U.S.C. 601-613), and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) at 48 CFR part 33.