alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

709315.0013/9058275.1 

AND UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

In Re: AUTOMOTIVE PARTS 

ANTITRUST LITIGATION 

12-md-02311 

Honorable Sean F. Cox 

Mag. Judge R. Steven Whalen

In Re: WIRE HARNESS CASES 

In Re: BEARINGS 

2:12-cv-00100-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00101-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00102-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00103-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-00106-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-00107-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-14451-SFC-MKM 

2:12-cv-00500-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00501-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00502-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-00503-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-12263-SFC-RSW 

2:12-cv-12932-SFC-RSW 

2:13-cv-00505-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-00507-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-12095-SFC-RSW 

2:14-cv-13356-SFC-RSW 

2:15-cv-12068-SFC-RSW 

THIS RELATES TO: 

ALL CASES 

/ 

 ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW LARRY S. GANGNES 

 This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Withdraw Appearance of Larry S. 

Gangnes as Counsel for Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd. and American Furukawa, Inc. 

(“Furukawa”), and Defendants Nachi-Fujikoshi Corp. and Nachi America Inc. (“Nachi”), and 

this Court states as follows: 

Case 2:14-cv-00106-SFC-MKM ECF No. 92, PageID.1620 Filed 08/10/22 Page 1 of 2
 2 

709315.0013/9058275.1 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 

 The Motion to Withdraw Appearance of Larry S. Gangnes as Counsel for Furukawa and 

Nachi in all actions, including all lead and class cases, is hereby GRANTED with immediate 

effect. 

Dated: August 10, 2022 s/Sean F. Cox 

 Sean F. Cox 

 U. S. District Judge 

Case 2:14-cv-00106-SFC-MKM ECF No. 92, PageID.1621 Filed 08/10/22 Page 2 of 2
#### § 81.57 Responses to motions and petitions.

Within 8 days after a written motion or petition is served, or such other period as the reviewing authority or the presiding officer may fix, any party may file a response thereto. An immediate oral response may be made to an oral motion.
§ 108.403 Fire extinguishing systems: General. ( a ) Each of the following on a unit must have an approved fixed gaseous type extinguishing system: ( 1 ) Each paint locker, oil room, and similar space.
( 2 ) Each enclosed space containing internal combustion or gas turbine main propulsion machinery.
( 3 ) Each enclosed space containing internal combustion machinery with an aggregate power of at least 1000 B.H.P.
( 4 ) Each enclosed space containing a fuel oil unit, including purifiers, valves, or manifolds for main propulsion machinery or internal combustion machinery with an aggregate power of at least 1000 B.H.P.
( 5 ) Each enclosed ventilation system for electric motors or generators used for vital services including bilge pumps, fire pumps, or propulsion.
( b ) Each space containing an oil fired boiler, the fuel oil unit or valves for the boiler, or manifolds in the line between the fuel settling tanks and the boiler on a unit must have a fixed gas type, foam, or other approved fire extinguishing system.
[CGD 73-251, 43 FR 56808, Dec. 4, 1978, as amended by CGD 95-027, 61 FR 26008, May 23, 1996]
# Senate Floor Activity - Tuesday, February 25, 2014

**

----

## The Journal

## Certain Procedures Dispensed With

## Transaction of Morning Business

## Legislative Business (Tuesday, February 25)

H.R. 2431

S. 1982

 44

## Executive Business (Tuesday, February 25)

PN1193

 40

 41

PN1194

 42

 43

PN1203

 39

## Adjournment

        -  Bills, Acts, & Laws 
        -  Nominations 
        -  Treaties 
        -  Votes 
        -  Floor Proceedings 
        -  Rules & Procedure 
        -  Landmark Legislation 
        -  Sessions of Congress 
        -  Senate Archives 
        -  Public Disclosure 

### Floor Activity Summaries 

View previous floor activity files.Stream live Senate floor proceedings while a meeting is in progress.View past floor proceedings on CSPAN

### Additional Information 

Use this site's search or visit the Senate Index to find pages by topic.

To learn about the history of the Senate visit the About the Senate section of Senate.gov.

### Contact Your Senators 

Follow this guide on how to contact your senators by phone, postal mail, or on the web.
##### 



Exhibit No. 99.1

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

In connection
 with the quarterly report of barnesandnoble.com inc. (the Company) on
 Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
 and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Marie J.
 Toulantis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge,
 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
 Act of 2002:



| | (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/ MARIE J. TOULANTIS                                                 
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |                                                                                  
| | Marie J. ToulantisChief Executive Officerbarnesandnoble.com inc.November 14, 2002
§ 86.38 Employment assistance to students. ( a ) *Assistance by recipient in making available outside employment.* A recipient which assists any agency, organization or person in making employment available to any of its students: ( 1 ) Shall assure itself that such employment is made available without discrimination on the basis of sex; and
( 2 ) Shall not render such services to any agency, organization, or person which discriminates on the basis of sex in its employment practices.
( b ) *Employment of students by recipients.* A recipient which employs any of its students shall not do so in a manner which violates subpart E of this part.
(Secs. 901, 902, Education Amendments of 1972, 86 Stat. 373, 374; 20 U.S.C. 1681, 1682)
#### Acme Harvesting Machine Company, appellant, v. A. E. Brigham, appellee.

Filed January 7, 1914.

No. 17,461.

Appeal: Instructions: Exceptions. “Instructions will not be reviewed where no exceptions were taken to them by the party complaining at the time the charge was given to the jury.” *State v. School District,*55 Neb. 317.

Appeal from, the district court for Clister county: Bruno O. Hostetler, Judge.

*Affirmed.*

*J. R. Dean, D. P. Stough*and *J. B. Dunn,*for appellant.

*Sullivan A Squires*and *R. E. Brega, contra.*

Fawcett, J.

Plaintiff brought this action in the district court for Custer county upon a promissory note. From a' verdict and judgment in favor of defendant, plaintiff appeals.

Counsel for plaintiff state: “Appellant presents but one question for review. It is respectfully submitted that the trial court erred in giving instruction No. 5 of its own motion (Trans, p. TO), and which was duly excepted to at the time (Trans.' p. 13).” Page 10 of the transcript referred to shows the instruction as given by the court. Page 13 shoivs paragraph IT of the motion for a neiv trial, Avhich recites: “The court erred in giving instruction No. 5 given of its own motion duly excepted to by the plaintiff at the time.” Counsel for defendant contend that plaintiff cannot now raise an objection to instruction No. 5, for the reason that no exception was taken to this instruction at the time it was given, and no exception thereto Avas allowed by the court, and that the record will so shoAv. An examination of the record sustains defendant’s contention. So far as the record shoAvs, no objection was made, or exception noted, to instruction No. 5 until three days after the trial, Avhen it was made in the motion for *63a new trial. Under the settled rule in this court, the instruction cannot now be reviewed. This has been the rule ever since *Brown v. Hurst,*3 Neb. 353, where it was held: “Exceptions to charge must be taken at the time the charge is given.” In *Smith v. Kennard,*54 Neb. 523, no exceptions were taken to the instructions given and refused by the court at the time of the trial, but exceptions were filed three days later. We held that it was too late.

No error having been assigned which we are at liberty to consider, the judgment of the district court is

Affirmed.

Barnes, Rose and Sedgwick, JJ., not sitting.
§ 73.735-506 Gifts and decorations from foreign governments. ( a ) An employee may not request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decorations from a foreign government or official thereof.
( b ) An employee may accept from a foreign government: ( 1 ) A gift which is in the nature of medical treatment or an educational scholarship;
( 2 ) A tangible gift of minimal value tendered or received as a mark of courtesy; (“Minimal value” means a retail value in the United States at the time of acceptance of not more than one hundred dollars, unless the Administrator of the General Services Administration adjusts the value by regulation.) or
( 3 ) A tangible gift of more than minimal value when it appears that to refuse the gift would be likely to cause offense or embarrassment or otherwise adversely affect the foreign relations of the United States. However, the acceptance of such a gift would be on behalf of the United States and the gift would become the property of the United States. See the Department's General Administration Manual, Chapter 20-25 for information regarding the disposition of a gift accepted under these circumstances.
( c ) An employee may also accept from a foreign government gifts of travel or expenses for travel (such as transportation, food and lodging) that take place entirely outside the United States and are of more than minimal value, if such acceptance is consistent with the interests of the United States and is approved by the travel approving authority in accordance with the Department's Travel Manual. See General Administration Manual, Chapter 20-25 for a requirement to report such travel.
( d ) An employee may accept, retain, and wear a decoration tendered in recognition of active field service in time of combat operations or awarded for other outstanding or unusually meritorious performance, subject to the approval of the Secretary or his or her designee.
( e ) Members of an employee's family and household are also subject to the regulations in this section. A member of an employee's family and household is a relative by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident of the household. However, if a member of an employee's family and household is employed by another agency of the Government, the offer or acceptance of a gift shall be treated under the regulations of that agency.
( f ) For purposes of this section “foreign government” means: ( 1 ) Any unit of foreign government authority including any foreign national, state, local and municipal government;
( 2 ) Any international or multinational organization whose membership is composed of any unit of foreign government described in paragraph (f)(1) of this section; or
( 3 ) Any agent or representative of any such unit or organization when acting as such agent or representative. (5 U.S.C. 7342)
§ 702.1 Definitions. For purposes of this part, the following definitions shall apply unless otherwise provided: ( a ) *The Act* means the United States Commission on Civil Rights Act of 1983, 97 Stat. 1301, as amended by the Civil Rights Commission Amendments Act of 1994, 108 Stat. 4339, codified in 42 U.S.C. 1975 through 1975d.
( b ) *The Commission* means the United States Commission on Civil Rights or, as provided in § 702.2, to any authorized subcommittee thereof.
( c ) *The Chairperson* means the Chairperson of the Commission or authorized subcommittee thereof or to any acting Chairperson of the Commission or of such subcommittee.
( d ) *Proceeding* means collectively to any public session of the Commission and executive session held in connection therewith.
( e ) *Hearing* means collectively to a public session of the Commission and any executive session held in connection therewith, including the attendance of witnesses or the production of written or other matters for which subpoenas have been issued.
( f ) *Witnesses* are persons subpoenaed to attend and testify or produce written or other matter.
( g ) *The rules in this part* means the Rules on Hearings of the Commission.
( h ) *Report* means statutory reports or portions thereof issued pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 1975a(c).
( i ) *Verified answer* means an answer the truth of which is substantiated by oath or affirmation attested to by a notary public or other person who has legal authority to administer oaths.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6616
LLOYD STEVEN LANE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus WILLIAM R. BARKER; EMILIO PAGAN; RONALD GODWIN; BILLY YARD BATTEN; MITCH LOWERY; THEODORE SWANN; MIKE WALKER; G. WAYNE SPEARS; JOHN WILLIAMS; LARRY MATHIS; MALCOLM L. DEBNAM; MELISSA SELLARS; OFFICER LAMM, Defendants - Appellees, and
J. R. HUNT; KATHY MERCER; LINWOOD TEDDER; KIM EDWARDS; LINDA MIASTO; J. COLEMAN; PATRICIA MABREY; MARGARET WILLIAMSON; WILLIAM BRITT;RAY JERNIGAN; HENRY CAMBELL; ANTHONY SINGLETARY; R ANDY CRIBB; HENRY CORR STEVENS; CAROL WHITAKER; JOHN R. MILLS; CLIFTON DAVENPORT; C. R. LINCOLN; LARRY W. MOORE; LYNN PHILLIPS; JAMES L. MILLER; FRANKLIN E. FREEMAN, JR.; J. A. DOBBIN; PAT CHAVIS, Defendants.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CA-93-431-5-CT-H) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 5, 19962 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lloyd Steven Lane, Appellant Pro Se. William Dennis Worley, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the magistrate judge's recommendation and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Lane v. Barker , No. CA-93-431-5-CT-H (E.D.N.C. Mar. 28, 1996). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Swilley *v.*Hooker *et al.*

Submitted March 3,

Decided August 17, 1906.

Appeal. Before Judge Mitchell. Brooks superior court. May 2, 1905.

*Stanley S. Bennet,*for plaintiff.

*J. W. Edmondson*and *L. W. Branch,*for defendants.

Atkinson, J.

1. On a note payable to Smith or order and indorsed by the-payee to Swilley, suit was brought in a county court in the name of Smith for the use of Swilley. From the judgment Swilley appealed in his own name to the superior court, and gave a bond, treating himself as the party plaintiff. A motion to dismiss the case was made on the ground that it appeared on the face of the proceeding that Smith had no title to the note and no right to bring suit upon it. The court announced orally that he would sustain the motion. Swilley moved to amend by striking from the declaration the name of Smith and the words “for the use of,” so as to leave the case to stand in his own name as plaintiff. The court refused to allow the amendment, on the ground that it was offered too-late, and dismissed the ease. *Held,*that this was error. *Woodbridge*v. *Drought,*118 *Ga.*671.

2. The fact that the presiding judge had announced orally that he would sustain the motion and dismiss the case, but had not signed any judgment to that effect, did not render a proper amendment then tendered too late, nor authorize him to reject it on that ground. *Lytle*v. *DeVaughn,*81 *Ga.*226; *Freeman*v. *Brown,*115 *Ga.*23.

*Judgment reversed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, O. J., absent.*
§ 900.103 Terms and abbreviations. ( a ) For the purposes of this part, the definitions in the CEQ Regulations, 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508, are adopted and supplemented as set out in paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section. In the event of a conflict the CEQ Regulations apply. ( 1 ) *Action.* Action and Federal action as defined in 40 CFR 1508.18, include projects, programs, plans, or policies, subject to the Commission's control and responsibility.
( 2 ) *Applicant.* The federal, state, local government or non-governmental partner or organization applying to the Commission for financial assistance or other approval. An applicant may also be a partner organization in receipt of award funds.
( 3 ) *Approving Official.* The Denali Commission staff member designated by the Federal Co-Chair or his/her designee to fulfill the responsibilities defined in § 900.106, including overseeing development of and approval of the NEPA document.
( 4 ) *Commission proposal (or proposal).* A proposal, as defined at 40 CFR 1508.23, is a Commission proposal whether initiated by the Commission, another federal agency, or an applicant.
( 5 ) *Federal Co-Chair.* One of the seven members of the Commission, appointed by the Secretary of Commerce, as defined in the Denali Commission Act of 1998, 42 U.S.C. 3121, Public Law 105-277.
( b ) The following abbreviations are used throughout this part: ( 1 ) CATEX—Categorical exclusions;
( 2 ) CEQ—Council on Environmental Quality;
( 3 ) EA—Environmental assessment;
( 4 ) EIS—Environmental impact statement;
( 5 ) FONSI—Finding of no significant impact;
( 6 ) NEPA—National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended;
( 7 ) NOI—Notice of intent; and
( 8 ) ROD—Record of decision.
###### Editorial Note on Part 85

#### Editorial Note:

At the request of the Department of Health and Human Services, the “Section-by-Section Analysis” portion of the preamble of the document published at 53 FR 25595, July 8, 1988, as corrected at 53 FR 26559, July 13, 1988, appears at the end of part 85.

#### §§ 85.52-85.60 [Reserved]
§ 108.444 Lockout valves. ( a ) A lockout valve must be provided on any carbon dioxide extinguishing system protecting a space over 6,000 cubic feet in volume and installed or altered after July 9, 2013. “Altered” means modified or refurbished beyond the maintenance required by the manufacturer's design, installation, operation and maintenance manual.
( b ) The lockout valve must be a manually operated valve located in the discharge manifold prior to the stop valve or selector valves. When in the closed position, the lockout valve must provide complete isolation of the system from the protected space or spaces, making it impossible for carbon dioxide to discharge in the event of equipment failure during maintenance.
( c ) The lockout valve design or locking mechanism must make it obvious whether the valve is open or closed.
( d ) A valve is considered a lockout valve if it has a hasp or other means of attachment to which, or through which, a lock can be affixed, or it has a locking mechanism built into it.
( e ) The master or person-in-charge must ensure that the valve is locked open at all times, except while maintenance is being performed on the extinguishing system, when the valve must be locked in the closed position.
( f ) Lockout valves added to existing systems must be approved by the Commandant as part of the installed system.
[USCG-2006-24797, 77 FR 33882, June 7, 2012]
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Theodore A. Boutacoff,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, certify that the Annual Report of IRIDEX Corporation on Form 10-K/A for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2010 (i) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of IRIDEX Corporation.

Date: February 2, 2011



By:

/s/ THEODORE A.
BOUTACOFF


Name:

Theodore A. BoutacoffTitle:

President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
#### Cora C. Vroom, as Administratrix of the Estate of Benjamin H. Vroom, Deceased, Respondent, *v.*The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant.

*Vroom*v. *R. 7. O. & R. R. R. R. Go.,*139 App. Div. 858, affirmed.

(Argued January 11, 1910;

decided January 25, 1910.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered January 13, 1909, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for the death of plaintiff’s intestate alleged to have occurred through the negligence of the defendant, his employer.

*Alfred L. Becker*for appellant.

*H. C. Minard*and *Charles L. Feldman*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs ; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Gray, Edward T. Bartlett, Haight, Vann, Werner and Hisoook, J J.
mr-ex101_15.htm



Exhibit 10.1

 

AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Amendment No. 1 to Executive Employment Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into effective as of June 1, 2020, by and between Montage Resources Corporation (the “Company”) and Matthew Rucker (“Executive”).

WHEREAS, the parties hereto entered into that certain Executive Employment Agreement, effective as of March 1, 2019 (the “Agreement”);

WHEREAS, effective as of June 1, 2020, Executive has been appointed as the Company’s Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer; and

WHEREAS, the parties hereto desire to amend the Agreement as set forth herein.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1.Section 1 of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the phrase “Executive Vice President, Resource Planning and Development” and replacing it with the phrase “Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer.”

2.Except as specifically set forth herein, the Agreement and all of its terms and conditions remain in full force and effect and the Agreement is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects, except that on and after the effective date of this Amendment all references in the Agreement to “this Agreement,” “hereto,” “hereof,” “hereunder” or words of like import shall mean the Agreement as amended by this Amendment.

3.This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which will be deemed to be an original, but all of which together will constitute one and the same instrument.

4.This Amendment is entered into under, and governed for all purposes by, the laws of the State of Texas, without regard to conflicts of laws principles thereof.  With respect to any claims, legal proceedings or litigation arising in connection with this Amendment, the parties hereto hereby consent to the exclusive jurisdiction, forum and venue of the state and federal courts, as applicable, located in Dallas County, Texas.

5.This Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of and be enforceable by the respective successors and assigns of the parties hereto.

[Remainder of page intentionally left blank; signature page follows.]






IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment effective as of the date first above written.

MONTAGE RESOURCES CORPORATION

By:  /s/ John K. Reinhart

Name:John K. Reinhart

Title:President and Chief Executive Officer

 

EXECUTIVE

By:/s/ Matthew Rucker

Name:Matthew Rucker