alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.2

                    MAXUS REAL PROPERTY INVESTORS-FOUR, L.P.

              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 Quarterly  Report of Maxus Real Property  Investors-Four,
L.P.  (the  "Partnership")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending May 31, 2003 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, John W. Alvey,  Vice  President,  Treasurer,  and Chief Financial
Officer of Maxus Capital Corp.,  General  Partner of the  Partnership,  certify,
pursuant  to 18  U.S.C.  ss.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  ss.  906  of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to 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
Partnership  as of May 31,  2003  (the last date of the  period  covered  by the
Report).


/s/ John W. Alvey
-----------------
John W. Alvey
Vice President, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer of
Maxus Capital Corp.,
General Partner of the Partnership
July 14, 2003
§ 34.15-40 Pressure relief—T/ALL. ( a ) Where necessary, relatively tight compartments such as refrigeration spaces, paint lockers, etc., shall be provided with suitable means for relieving excessive pressure accumulating within the compartment when the carbon dioxide is injected.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                         303,160
<SECURITIES>                                   246,473
<RECEIVABLES>                                  641,130
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,865
<INVENTORY>                                    126,021
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,470,045
<PP&E>                                         285,822
<DEPRECIATION>                                 131,112
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,884,218
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,363,665
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     4,210,925
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                 (3,690,372)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,884,218
<SALES>                                      2,412,782
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,412,782
<CGS>                                        1,402,163
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,402,163
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,060
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (185,608)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (185,608)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

                    MAXUS REAL PROPERTY INVESTORS-FOUR, L.P.

              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

In connection with the Quarterly  Report of Maxus Real Property  Investors-Four,
L.P. (the "Partnership") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending August 31, 2003 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"), I, Danley K. Sheldon,  President and Chief Executive Officer of Maxus
Capital  Corp.,  General  Partner of the  Partnership,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to 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
Partnership  as of August 31,  2003 (the last date of the period  covered by the
Report).


/s/ Danley K. Sheldon
-----------------------
Danley K. Sheldon
President and Chief Executive Officer of
Maxus Capital Corp.,
General Partner of the Partnership
October 7, 2003
#### Same *v.*Same. Same *v.*Same. Same *v.*Same.

Orders modified as above directed.
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

____________

No. 17-2253

____________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

ERNEST VALENTINE, a/k/a BOP

Earnest Valentine, 

 Appellant

____________

On Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the District of New Jersey

(D.C. No. 2-16-cr-00264-001)

District Judge: Honorable Jose L. Linares

____________

Submitted Under Third Circuit L.A.R. 34.1(a)

March 23, 2018

Before: HARDIMAN, BIBAS, and ROTH, Circuit Judges.

(Opinion Filed: June 7, 2018)

____________

OPINION*

____________

 

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does 

not constitute binding precedent.
2

HARDIMAN, Circuit Judge.

Ernest Valentine appeals the District Court’s judgment of sentence, claiming legal 

error in the calculation of his criminal history. According to Valentine, § 4A1.2(c)(2) of 

the United States Sentencing Guidelines precluded the District Court from assigning him 

a criminal history point for his convictions under a New Jersey statute forbidding 

“loitering for the purpose of illegally using, possessing or selling a controlled substance.” 

N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2C:33-2.1(b). As Valentine acknowledges, we rejected this argument in 

United States v. Hines, 628 F.3d 101, 109–14 (3d Cir. 2010). Because we—like the 

District Court—are bound by Hines unless and until it is overturned by the Supreme 

Court or by this Court sitting en banc, see 3d Cir. I.O.P. 9.1, we will affirm.
EX-10.3



 






Exhibit 10.3









Computer Associates International, Inc.



Restricted Stock Award Certificate




	 	 	 
	                                                            

	 	                    
	Name of Participant

	 	     EmplID






	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	Grant Number
	 	 	 	 
	 	Total Number of Restricted Shares Granted

	 	 	**Total Granted**	 
	 	Grant Date

	 	 	Grant Date	 
	 	Stock Price on Grant Date

	 	 	Price	 
	 




This Certificate confirms the grant under the Computer Associates International, Inc. 2002
Incentive Plan, amended and restated effective as of March 31, 2004 (the “Plan”), to the
above-named participant of the amount of Restricted Stock set forth above. This Certificate
merely evidences such grant, and does not constitute property of any nature or type or confer any
additional rights. This grant is subject in all respects to the applicable terms of the Plan,
which are incorporated by reference in this Certificate. A copy of the Plan may be obtained at no
cost by contacting the Corporate Treasurer.



The Restricted Stock set forth above will vest as follows: 34% of the total shares will vest
immediately on the Grant Date set forth above and the remaining shares will vest in two equal
installments on each of the first anniversary and second anniversary of such Grant Date, provided
that the above-named participant remains employed through the applicable vesting date. Shares of
Restricted Stock that are included in this award may not be transferred by the participant prior
to vesting and shall be forfeited by the participant upon the participant’s Termination of
Employment, as defined in the Plan, prior to vesting for any reason other than death or
Disability, as defined in the Plan.



The Company may satisfy any federal income tax withholding obligations that arise in connection
with the vesting of the Restricted Stock (or in connection with an election by the participant
under section 83(b) of the Internal Revenue Code, 1986, as amended, with respect to the Restricted
Stock) by withholding shares of Restricted Stock that are part of this award having a Fair Market
Value, as defined in the Plan, on the date the shares of Restricted Stock first become taxable
equal to the minimum statutory withholding obligation with respect to such taxable shares.




	 	 	 
	

	 	
	By

	 	                                                                                                    
	 
	 	 
	

	 	                         Jeff Clarke
	

	 	                    Chief Operating Officer
§ 42.20-8 Flooding standard: Type “B” vessel, 100 percent reduction. ( a ) Design calculations must be submitted that demonstrate that the vessel will remain afloat in the conditions of equilibrium specified in § 42.20-12 assuming the damage specified in § 42.20-11 as applied to the following flooding standards: ( 1 ) If the vessel is 225 meters (738 feet) or less in length, it must be able to withstand the flooding of any two adjacent fore and after compartments excluding the machinery space;
( 2 ) If the vessel is over 225 meters (738 feet) in length, the flooding standard of paragraph (a)(1) of this section must be applied, treating the machinery space, taken alone, as a floodable compartment.
( b ) When doing the calculations required in paragraph (a) of this section, the following permeabilities must be assumed: ( 1 ) 0.95 in all locations except the machinery space.
( 2 ) 0.85 in the machinery space.
[CGD 79-153, 48 FR 38648, Aug. 25, 1983]
#### § 30.10-42 Machinery space—TB/ALL.

The term *machinery space* means any space that contains machinery and related equipment including Category A machinery spaces, propelling machinery, boilers, oil fuel units, steam and internal combustion engines, generators and centralized electrical machinery, oil filling stations, refrigeration, stabilizing, ventilation, and air conditioning machinery, and similar spaces and trunks to such spaces.

[CGD 74-127, 41 FR 3843, Jan. 26, 1976]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 101 (Friday, May 25, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 29304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2641]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology

[Docket No. 070320063-7064-01]


Advanced Technology Program; Extension of Due Date for Proposals

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology, United States 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Due to technical difficulties, NIST is extending the deadline 
for proposal submission for its Advanced Technology Program competition 
to 3 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday, May 25, 2007. NIST will accept only 
paper submissions during the extended time period.

DATES: Paper submissions must be received no later than 3 p.m. Eastern 
Time, Friday, May 25, 2007.

ADDRESSES: Paper submissions must be sent to National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, Advanced Technology Program, 100 Bureau 
Drive, Mail Stop 4701, Gaithersburg, MD 20899-4701.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Lambis at 301-975-4447 or by 
e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#73311201111201125d1f121e111a00331d1a00075d141c05"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c183a0b3a3a0b3a0efada0aca3a8b281afa8b2b5efa6aeb7">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On April 10, 2007, the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology (NIST) Advanced Technology Program (ATP) 
announced that it was soliciting proposals for a single fiscal year 
2007 competition (72 FR 17838). The due date for submission of all 
proposals was 3 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday, May 21, 2007. Due to 
technical difficulties, NIST was unable to accept some proposals 
electronically during the day on Monday, May 21, 2007. Therefore, 
electronic proposals received between 3 p.m. and 11:59 p.m. Eastern 
Time on May 21, 2007 are deemed timely. Additionally, NIST is extending 
the deadline for any paper submissions. Paper submissions must be 
received by 3 p.m. Eastern Time, Friday, May 25, 2007. During the 
extended time period, NIST will accept only paper submissions. This 
paper submission deadline applies to any mode of paper proposal 
delivery, including hand-delivery, courier, and express mailing. ATP 
will not make any allowances for late submissions. All ATP competition 
requirements and information announced in the April 10, 2007 Federal 
Register notice apply to proposals submitted during the extended time 
period.
    Proposers who attempted to submit electronic applications but were 
unsuccessful must resubmit a paper application. Please remember paper 
submission requires an original and fifteen (15) copies.

    Dated: May 23, 2007.
James M. Turner,
Deputy Director.
[FR Doc. 07-2641 Filed 5-23-07; 12:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510-13-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### John W. Bigelow, *Appellant, v.*Life Association of America, *Responde*nt.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event. Opinion

*Per Curiam.*
§ 34.17-20 Discharge outlets—T/ALL. ( a ) Discharge outlets shall be of an approved type.
Exhibit 15.1





August 14,
2009





American Medical Alert Corp.


Oceanside, New York





We have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of
the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the unaudited interim financial information of American
Medical Alert Corp. and Subsidiaries for the fiscal periods endedJune 30,
2009andJune 30, 2008, as indicated in our report datedAugust14, 2009.  Because we didnot perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that
information.





We are aware that our report referred to above, which is
included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter endedJune 30,
2009,
is incorporated by reference in the following Registration Statements:





·
            Registration Statement No. 33-48385 on Form
      S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 33-91806 on Form
      S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-53029 on
      Form S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-70626 on
      Form S-8;


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-130811 on
      Form S-8; and


·
            Registration Statement No. 333-88192 on
      Form S-3.





We also are aware that the aforementioned report,
pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is not
considered a part of the Registration Statements prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended.





/s/
Margolin, Winer & Evens LLP





Margolin, Winer & Evens LLP


Garden City, New York
#### ANNA WILSON, PLAINTIFF, v. DAVID B. BROWN, DEFENDANT.

Submitted October 12, 1928

Decided April 11, 1929.

Before Gummebe, Chief Justice, and Justice Paekee.

*390Eor the plaintiff, *Francis A. Gordon.*

Eor the defendant, *Samuel D. Williams.*

Pek Cukiam.

The substantial reasons presented on this rule were that tire verdict was against the weight of evidence and that it was contrary to the charge of the court; also that it was excessive. There seems to be no argument in the brief on the point that the verdict was against the charge of the court. We do not think it was against the weight of the evidence. The plaintiff was riding in a taxicab from Elizabeth to Elizabeth-port on a wet, slippery day, and passing Clark Place, which comes in from the south but does not cross Third street, the taxicab was met by the defendant’s truck coming north on Clark Place and beginning to turn to its left and towards the west. This would cause the truck to cross in front of the taxicab if there was room to do so; there was not room but as indicated by the testimony the truck continued to turn to its left and the taxicab driver in trying to avoid the collision swerved to his left toward the north side of Third street and was caught by the truck at the right hind wheel and jammed against a telegraph pole. As Mrs. Wilson was merely a passenger in the taxicab, no question of negligence of her driver is involved and we are concerned merely with the negligence of the defendant’s driver. There is not much argument in the brief on the question of liability, and we are clear that the verdict should not be set aside as against the weight of evidence, especially in view of the admissions by the defendant’s driver on the stand that his brakes had been slipping that day, which was most likely as the weather was wet and rainy.

. As to the amount of the verdict which was for $3,500, there is an attempt to minimize the injuries, but while no bones were broken, the plaintiff suffered a general shaking up and bruises, a minor concussion of the brain with local injury to the nerves, she was ten days in hospital, three weeks in bed at home, three months confined to the house, lost a great deal of income as a practical nurse because of her disability, and *391at the time of the trial she testified she still did not have enough grip in her hand to lift a flat iron, and if any strength is required in her occupation of nursing she has to call for help.

We are perfectly clear that the rule should be discharged and confess to some surprise that it was ever granted.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2570 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2570

   To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to establish a base 
                   minimum wage for tipped employees.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2009

   Ms. Edwards of Maryland (for herself, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Lewis of 
 Georgia, Ms. Pingree of Maine, Mr. Carson of Indiana, Ms. Waters, Mr. 
Hare, Ms. Clarke, Ms. Sutton, Mr. Butterfield, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, 
   Mr. McGovern, Ms. Woolsey, Ms. Lee of California, Ms. Watson, Ms. 
McCollum, Ms. DeLauro, Mr. Connolly of Virginia, Mr. Moran of Virginia, 
 Mr. Ellison, and Mr. Welch) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to establish a base 
                   minimum wage for tipped employees.

    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 ``Working for Adequate Gains for 
Employment in Services Act'' or ``WAGES Act''.

SEC. 2. BASE MINIMUM WAGE FOR TIPPED EMPLOYEES.

    Section 3(m)(1) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 
203(m)(1)) is amended by adding before the semicolon the following: ``, 
except that, for purposes of this paragraph, the cash wage paid such 
employee shall be not less than--
                    ``(A) $3.75 an hour beginning 90 days after the 
                date of enactment of the Working for Adequate Gains for 
                Employment in Services Act;
                    ``(B) $5.00 an hour beginning July 1, 2011; and
                    ``(C) beginning on July 1, 2012 and adjusted as 
                necessary thereafter, 70 percent of the wage in effect 
                under section 6(a)(1) but in no case less than $5.50 an 
                hour.''.

SEC. 3. PUBLICATION OF NOTICE.

    Section 6 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206) 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(h) Not later than 10 days prior to the effective date of any 
increase in the minimum wage for tipped employees in accordance with 
section 3(m)(1), the Secretary shall publish (in the Federal Register 
and on the Internet website of the Department of Labor) a notice 
announcing the amount of the adjusted wage.''.
                                 <all>
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2014

d0421 

# Order

Clerk April 28, 2014

148496

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148496

COA: 310900

Macomb CC: 2011

- 002403

- FH

DENNIS FRANK BOTHEL,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 5, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DEN IED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

V IVIANO , J., did not participate because he presided over this case in the circuit

court.