alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.1


    
      

      

    

    

      Exhibit
        4.1

      


      BRAVERMAN
        INTERNATIONAL, P.C.

      Certified
        Public Accountants

      1255
        McDonald Drive

      PRESCOTT,
        AZ 86303

      CELL
        602-881-3870

      PHONE
        928-771-1122, FAX 928-777-8378

      


      hiluv007@aol.com

      


      March
        23,
        2006

      


      To
        The
        Board of Directors,

      FUSA
        Capital Corporation

      


      This
        letter is being sent to you as notification that Braverman International,
        P.C.
        is herewith withdrawing from the audit of FUSA Capital Corporation, effective
        today, as we can no longer can rely on the representations of management
        and its
        internal controls in connection with the examination of the consolidated
        financial statements of FUSA Capital Corporation and Subsidiary. 

      


      A
        letter
        of termination is also being sent to the Securities and Exchange Commission
        today and you are thereby required to file Form 8-K notifying them of this
        matter. Until that form is filed, I will remain the auditor of
        record.

      


      Although
        I had hoped that the termination based on the above reasons could have been
        avoided, had I been afforded the opportunity of visiting your offices and
        discussing the many audit issues encountered directly with the Board of
        Directors and continue with other facets of the audit at that time , your
        silence in regard to my several requests to make that trip during the weekend
        of
        March 24-26, 2006, this leaves me to conclude that you do not want to explain
        or
        discuss any of the matters involving the conditions under which our relationship
        is being terminated.

      


      I
        will
        return all of your documents via Fedex forthwith and I would appreciate your
        payment of the balance on the account when billed to you. In appreciation
        of
        doing that, I will make available all audit files to whomever you choose
        to
        succeed me. Any copying and postage, etc. costs will be requested in
        advance

      


      Sincerely,

      /s/
        Ivan
        Braverman

      Ivan
        Braverman, President

      Braverman
        International, P.C.
CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF ACCOUNTING OFFICER OF PALMETTO BANCSHARES, INC.PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 

The undersigned, as the chief executiveofficer and chief accounting officer of Palmetto Bancshares, Inc., certify thatthe Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2003, whichaccompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and thatthe information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofPalmetto Bancshares, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.  The foregoing certification is made pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and no purchaseror seller of securities or any other person shall be entitled to rely upon theforegoing certification for any purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaims any obligation to update the foregoingcertification except as required by law.

 

 

By:

/s/      L. Leon Patterson                           L.Leon Patterson Chairman and Chief Executive Officer

/s/      Paul W. Stringer                                Paul W. Stringer President and Chief Operating OfficerChief Accounting Officer)

Date:   May 15, 2003
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 889

To require that, as a condition of receiving salary, each United States district

judge must certify that certain cases before the judge have not been

pending and undetermined for more than 90 days after being submitted

for decision.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 6, 2001

Mr. LANTOS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To require that, as a condition of receiving salary, each

United States district judge must certify that certain

cases before the judge have not been pending and undetermined for more than 90 days after being submitted

for decision.

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

3 SECTION 1. AFFIDAVIT BEFORE RECEIPT OF SALARY BY

4 DISTRICT JUDGE.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—A United States district judge

6 may not receive his or her salary for any month unless

7 the judge has submitted an affidavit to the Director of
2

•HR 889 IH

1 the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, no

2 earlier than 7 days before the end of that month, stating

3 that, as of the date of the affidavit, no case tried without

4 a jury before the judge, and no case submitted to the

5 judge for sentencing following a trial by jury, remains

6 pending and undetermined for more than 90 days after

7 it has been submitted for decision.

8 (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to

9 a judge with respect to any month on account of a case

10 remaining pending before the judge for more than 90 days

11 if the judge submits an affidavit certifying that the case

12 remains pending on account of the unusual complexity of

13 the case, or other extraordinary circumstances, and in14 cludes with the affidavit a specific explanation of the basis

15 for the affidavit.

16 (c) SALARY WITHHELD.—In any case in which the

17 salary of a judge is not paid on account of subsection (a),

18 the salary shall be paid as soon as the judge submits an

19 affidavit stating that no case remains pending and unde20 cided for more than 90 days after being submitted for de21 cision.

22 SEC. 2. DEFINITION.

23 For purposes of this Act, a case has been ‘‘submitted

24 for decision’’ on whichever of the following occurs later:
3

•HR 889 IH

1 (1) In a case to be tried without a jury, the

2 date on which—

3 (A) all claims and counterclaims have been

4 filed in the case; or

5 (B) all discovery in the case has been com6 pleted.

7 (2) In a case submitted to the court for sen8 tencing following a trial by jury, the date on which

9 the jury rendered its verdict.

Æ
Opinion filed April 11 , 201 3



## In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________


### No. 11

- 12

- 00170

- C R

_________
DWIGHT ELCHINSON A/K/A DWIGHT HOWARD ETCHISON A/K/A DWIGHT ELCHINISON , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 238 th District Court

Midland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No . CR39015

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
The jury convicted Dwight Elchinson a/k/a Dwight Howard Etchison a/k/a Dwight

Elchinison of felony driving while intoxicated

. T he trial court sentenced him to confinement in

the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for a t erm of eight years.

W e dismiss the appeal.
Appellant’s court

- appointed counsel has filed a motion to withdraw in this appeal. The
motion is supported by a brief in which counsel professionally and conscientiously examines the
record and applicable law a nd states that he has concluded that the appeal is frivolous. Counsel2 has provided A ppellant with a copy of the brief and advised A ppellant of his right to review the
record and file a response to counsel’s brief. A response has not been filed. 1 Court

- a ppointed
counsel has complied with the requirements of Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967); In re

Schulman , 252 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008); Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1991); High v. State , 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App . 1978); Currie v. State , 516
S.W.2d 684 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Gainous v. State , 436 S.W.2d 137 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969);

and Eaden v. State , 161 S.W.3d 173 (Tex. App.

— Eastland 2005, no pet.). Following the
procedures outlined in Anders and Schulman , we h ave independently reviewed the record, and
we agree that the appeal is without merit and should be dismissed. Schulman , 2 52 S.W.3d at

409.
We note that counsel has the responsibility to advise A ppellant that he may file a petition
for discretionary review with the clerk of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals seeking review
by that court. T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 48.4 (“In criminal cases, the attorney representing the defendant on
appeal shall, within five days after the opinion is handed down, send his client a copy of the
opinion and judgment, along with notification of the defendant’s right to file a pro se petition for
discretionary review under Rule 68.”). Likewise, this court advises A ppellant that h e may file a
petition for discretionary review pursuant to T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 68.
The motion to withdraw is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

April 11 , 2013
Do not publish. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).
Panel consists of: Wright, C.J., McCall, J., and Willson, J.

1 By letter, this c ourt granted Appellant thirty days in which to exercise his right to file a response to counsel’s brief.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 921 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 921

    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the tax on 
                     vaccines to 25 cents per dose.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 7, 2001

Mr. Lewis of Kentucky introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the tax on 
                     vaccines to 25 cents per dose.

    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 ``Vaccinate America's Children Now 
Act''.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN TAX ON VACCINES.

    (a) In General.--Paragraph (1) of section 4131(b) of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amount of tax) is amended by striking 
``75 cents'' and inserting ``25 cents''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
    (c) Limitation on Certain Credits or Refunds.--For purposes of 
applying section 4132(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with 
respect to any claim for credit or refund filed before January 1, 2002, 
the amount of tax taken into account shall not exceed the tax computed 
under the rate in effect on the day after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit 32.2  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 Union Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of her 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 as of and for the periods covered in the Report.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Union Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Union Bankshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


|                        | 
|----------------------- | 
|/s/ Marsha A. Mongeon   | 
|Marsha A. Mongeon       | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 

May 14, 2010
-----Original Message----- 

From: Roger Aveyard [mailto:draveyard@inebraska.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, May 26, 2009 4:32 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: parity legislation 

Please pass the Wellstone/Domenici Mental Health parity act. This is 

long overdue. Thank you.
The 
NWTRB is an independent agency of the U.S. Federal Government. Its sole purpose
is to provide independent scientific and technical oversight of the
Department of Energy's program for managing and disposing of high-level radioactive
waste and spent nuclear fuel. Today:Current as ofFebruary 7, 2013
Updated Meeting Calendar
Please note: our PDFs are best viewed using Acrobat Reader 9, which can be downloaded free at the Adobe web site.

**Mission**
    **A look at the Board and its mission****Members**
    **Biographies of Board members and Board members' speeches and papers****Reports**
    **Summaries and full text of Board reports****Fact Sheets**
    **Brief summaries in select technical areas****Correspondence**
    **Correspondence to and from the Board****Testimony**
    **Congressional testimony****Press**
    **Press releases and meeting announcements****Calendar**
    **Schedule of upcoming Board meetings and events****Meetings**
    **Past Board meeting transcripts, materials, and agendas****Plans**
    **Strategic plans, performance budgets, and operating guidelines****Links**
    **Other nuclear waste web sites****Site Info**
    **Site overview, contact information,  help and privacy policy** � 2001.  U.S. Nuclear Waste Review Board.  All Rights Reserved.**Contact NWTRB**Privacy policyContent inventory
NWTRB FOIANWTRB No Fear Act
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 141 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                          May 17, 2001.
    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order 
without intervention of any point of order to consider in the House the bill 
(H.R. 622) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand the adoption 
credit, and for other purposes. The bill shall be considered as read for 
amendment. The amendment recommended by the Committee on Ways and Means now 
printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The previous question shall 
be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without 
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the bill, as amended, 
equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of 
the Committee on Ways and Means; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1049.html[7/22/2015 7:02:15 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-77rx

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1049

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: William Anonymous

General Comment

I don't need the government making as big of a mess of my retirement as they did with the health insurance .

 Please stay out of it
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1046.html[7/22/2015 7:02:16 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-hqwv

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1046

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Levi Anonymous

General Comment

I do not think that the government should be involved in how people manage or plan their retirement accounts

 anymore than they already are. We are a free nation and that means that we are free to make our own choices

 whether good or bad so stop trying to make them for us.
Written Statement of the Chief Financial Officer
of CNA Financial Corporation
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
(As adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  
    
    the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 filed on
the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Dated: February 22, 2011
    
    By
    
    /s/ D. Craig MenseD. Craig Mense 
Chief Financial Officer
### NUMBER 13
- 15
- 000 30 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI
- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ SELVINO PADILLA JR. AND JEFFREY M. STERN , A ppellants ,

v. ALEX AZOCA , A ppellee

.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the 430th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justice Rodriguez and Longoria

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellants, Selvino Padilla Jr. and Jeffrey M. Stern , perfected an appeal from a judgment entered by the 430th District Court of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number
C

- 2332

- 13

- J . Appe llants have filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on grounds that appellants no longer wish to pursue this appeal . Appellants request that this Court2

dismiss the appeal. The certificate of conference reflects that appellant s ha ve been unsuccessful in attempts to contact appellee. The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellants ’ motion to dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(a). Appellants ’ motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is hereby
DISMISSED. There being no agreement in the motion regarding costs, pursuant to Rule 42.1(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, all costs are taxed against appellant s

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.1(d) ("Abs ent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having di smissed the appeal at appellant s ’ request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith.

PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed the 30th day of April , 20 15

.
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 Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [FDA  225-07-8405]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing notice of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA and the University System of Maryland to establish terms of collaboration to support shared interests that can proceed through a variety of programs including collaborative research, public outreach, cooperative international initiatives, interdisciplinary training, and exchange of scientists and staff through sabbaticals, postdoctoral fellowships, and student internships.

# DATES:

The agreement became effective July 12, 2007.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mary I. Poos, Office of External Relations (HF-10), Food and Drug Administration, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD  20857, 301-827-2825.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In accordance with 21 CFR 20.108(c), which states that all written agreements and MOUs between FDA and others shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                    , the agency is publishing notice of this MOU.                

Dated: August 29, 2007.

Jeffrey Shuren,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

      ( print page 51450)          ( print page 51451)          ( print page 51452)          ( print page 51453)          ( print page 51454)          ( print page 51455)          ( print page 51456)          ( print page 51457)          ( print page 51458)    

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S

[FR Doc. 07-4404 Filed 9-6-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-C
100.11.29 13:51 B C:\permftp\lps6618\lps6618.tpp --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps6618 lps6618.tpp
100.12.20 12:31 B C:\permftp\lps6618\lps6618.tpp --> permanent.access.gpo.gov /diska/netsite-docs/lps6618 lps6618.tpp
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

JOAN LICHTMAN,

Petitioner

v.

ELIZABETH HERSH, SANDRA VASKO, SERGE LEVIN, ANN RUDNICK, JOYCE SACCO, MARY SCULLION, CAROL THOMAS, BRIGID TOMS, JONATHAN JUCKETT, LINDA DONOVAN

- MAGDAMO,

NICOLE SUMMERVILLE, CURTIS JORDAN, EDWARD FARRINGTON, DANIEL FEINBERG, M.D., JANEL DAVIS, AND GINA GENTILE,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 236 EAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 15th day of February, 2023

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

and the Application for Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis are DENIED

.