alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 806 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

November 8, 2007. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider the conference report to accompany 

the bill (H.R. 3222) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 

2008, and for other purposes. All points of order against the 

conference report and against its consideration are waived. 

The conference report shall be considered as read. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

TOM WILSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security Administration,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C05-5734FDB

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT

AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's complaint, the Report and Recommendation of Judge J.

Kelley Arnold, United States Magistrate Judge and the remaining record, and there being no objections,

does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) The administrative decision is AFFIRMED; and

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to plaintiff's counsel, defendant's counsel

and Magistrate Judge J. Kelley Arnold.

DATED this 26th day of January 2007.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:05-cv-05734-FDB Document 19 Filed 01/26/07 Page 1 of 1
Appeal Reinstated, Motion Granted, Appeal Dismissed, and Memorandum 

Opinion filed April 29, 2021.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-20-00618-CV

FLUID POWER EQUIPMENT, INC., PEERLESS ENTERPRISES & 

ROBERT NOBLE SHELL, Appellants

V.

DEBORAH P. WILSON, AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX FOR THE 

ESTATE OF JOHN WILLIAM WILSON, Appellee

On Appeal from the 157th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2015-67171

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed June 25, 2020. The appeal was 

abated on November 17, 2020. On April 20, 2021, appellants filed a motion to 

dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. We reinstate the appeal, grant the 

motion, and dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Jewell and Zimmerer.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                             447
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,651
<ALLOWANCES>                                       938
<INVENTORY>                                      5,517
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                13,558
<PP&E>                                          18,779
<DEPRECIATION>                                   6,350
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  52,592
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           43,075
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            96
<OTHER-SE>                                       8,200
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    52,592
<SALES>                                         14,009
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                14,009
<CGS>                                            9,708
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,708
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,095
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,934
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,538)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        92
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,478)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (4,325)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,803)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.58)


</TABLE>
## CAUSE NO. 03-14-00315-CV

IN THE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

JADON NEWMAN

Appellant v. FIRSTMARK CREDIT UNION

Appellee UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING

Respectfully submitted, Craig S. Smith SBN 18553570 14493 S.P.I.D., suite A, P.M.B. 240 Corpus Christi, Tx. 78418 361 728 8037 csslawrr@gmail.com ACCEPTED 03-14-00315-CV 6815264 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS 9/7/2015 2:15:31 PM JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERKTO THE HONORABLE THIRD COURT OF APPEALS:

COM ES NOW

J ad on Newm an , res pect fu l l y s h o w i n g th e Co u rtas fo l l o ws : 1 . Ap p el l an ti s J ad onNewm an ; Ap pel l ee i s Fi rs tm arkCred i tUn i on . 2 . Th i s m o t i o ni s fi l edo nSep t em b er 8 , 2 0 15 . Th e d ead l i n e fo r fi l in g Ap p el l an t s ’ M o t i o n fo r Reh eari n g i s Sep t em b er 8 , 2 0 1 5 . 3 . Ap p el l an trequ es t s an ad d i t i o n al 7 d ay s t o fi l e h i s M o t i o nfo r Reh eari n g , ex t en d i n g th e t i m e u n t i l Sep t em b er 1 5 , 2 0 1 5. 4 . Th i s i s Ap p el l an t ’ s fi rs tm o t i o nfo r an ex t en si on o f t i m e t o fi l e h i s M o t i o n fo r Reh eari n g . 5 . Ap p el l an tn eed s ad di t i o n al t i m e t o fi l e h i s M ot i o n fo r Reh eari n g b ecau s e h i s co u ns el i s carefu ll y

s tu dy in g the Co u rt ’ s Op i ni o nan dn eed s m ore t im e t o drafta M o t i onfo r Reh eari n g . Co u n s el al s o h as s ev eral o th er p res s i n g cas es wh i ch co n su m i n g p ro fes s io nal t im e. 6 . Th i s m o t i o ni s u n o pp o s ed .PRAYER

Ap p el l an tm ov es th e Co u rt fo r a 7 d ay ex t en s io no f t i m e wi th i nwh i cht o fi le h i s M o t i o nfo r Reh eari n g an d fo r al l o th er rel i ef t o wh i ch h e i s en ti t l ed .
Res p ect fu l l y

s ubm i tt ed , / s / Crai g S. Sm i th Crai g S. Sm i th CERTI FI CATE OF SERVI CE AND CONFERENCE I Crai g S. Sm i thcert i fy

th ato nSep tem

b er 8 , 2 01 5 , I s erv ed th e fo ll o wi n g Co u n s el b y

em ai l wi ththi s m o t i o n fo r ex t en si o no f t i m e. OnSep tem b er 2 , 2 0 1 5 , m y co -co u n s el Pet er Ru gg ero co n s u lt edwi thLes s i e Fi t zp at ri ckan ds h e d o es n o t o p p o s e th i s m ot io n . Les s i e Fi tzp at ri ck Lfi t zp at ri ck @ FBHS.co m Li s a Fan ch er Lfan ch er@ FBHS.co m 9 8 San J aci n to Bl vd , s u it e 2 0 0 0 Au s t i n , Tx . 7 8 70 1 / s / Crai g S. Sm i th Crai g S. Sm i th
Case No. 7,691.

#### KENDALL et al. v. BADGER.

[1 McAll. 523.] 1

Circuit Court, California.2

Jan. Term, 1859.

Promissory Note — Demand *of*Patment — Aver-ments.

1. In an action against a party primarily liable on a promissory note made payable at a particular place, demand for payment at that place need not be averred.

[See Bank of U. S. v. Bussard, Case No. 911.]

2. If the maker was ready at the time and place to pay, it is matter of defense.

3. A discharge of a defendant, a citizen of this state, from a foreign contract is no bar to an action brought against him upon it.

An action was brought in this case by the payees against the maker of a promissory note. Defense was, that no allegation in complaint was made of presentment for payment at the place named in the note; and, further, that defendant had been discharged under the insolvent law of this state. Held, that plaintiffs [Kendall. McDonald *&*Stetson] were entitled to judgment.

Halleck, Peachy & Billings and Gregory Sale, for plaintiffs.

Hall McAllister, for defendant

1

 [Reported by Cutler McAllister. Esq.]

2

 [District not given.]

McALLISTER, Circuit Judge.

A demurrer was filed in this case, and the ground assigned is, that there is no allegation in the complaint that the note sued on was presented for payment at the place at which it is made payable on its face. The action is brought by the payees against the maker, who is primarily, not second¿rily, liable. In such an action, between such parties, a demand for payment need not be averred. If the maker was ready at the time and place, and offered to pay, it is a matter of defense to be pleaded and proved. Wallace v. McConnell, 13 Pet. [38 U. S.] 136, Brabston v. Gibson, 9 How. [50 U. S.] 279. The demurrer is therefore overruled.

An answer has been filed which pleads in bar of this action the discharge of the dei'end-.ant on 3d June, 1S57, under the insolvent law of this state, approved May 4, 1852. To this answer a demurrer has been filed. The note sued on is in the following words: “Boston, Jan’y 1, 1856. $l,194sVioo- Eight months after date, I promise to pay to the order of Kendall, McDonald & Stetson, eleven hundred and ninety-four BVioo dollars, at the office of Andrew Carney, 40 State street. Boston, for value received. Wm. G. Badger.’It is in proof that all the payees of said note, at the time of the execution thereof, were citizens of Massachusetts, except one, and he at the time was a citizen of the state of New York; and, further, that defendant, the maker of said note, was at the same time a citizen of the state of California, and has continued such to the present time. The *303facts on the face of the note, its date, and the place where it is payable, stamp it as a Massachusetts contract. In view of these circumstances, the discharge of defendant, under the insolvent act of this state, cannot bar the present action. In the case of Byrd v. Badger [Case No. 2,265], decided by this -court in its January term, 1858, this precise question was decided with the authorities given for its enunciation. It is useless to repeat them. The demurrer to the answer must be sustained.
From: lin-dab97@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:20:54 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Linda Bonner

Wellington, OH 44090
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

PAUL SORNBERGER,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C05-5771KLS

ORDER GRANTING

PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION TO

PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

Plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis (Dkt. #1) is GRANTED. Plaintiff does not

appear to have funds available to afford the $250.00 filing fee.

The clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel of record and to issue the Summonses.

DATED this 5th day of December, 2005.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05771-FDB Document 2 Filed 12/05/05 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. § 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of
Smart & Final Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 23, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Richard N. Phegley, Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, based on my knowledge, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|-- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                 
|-----------------
|Date: May 2, 2003
|                 



A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Smart & Final Inc. and will be retained by Smart & Final Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



This certification accompanies the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities Exchange Commission, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing).
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 193 (Friday, October 6, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22306]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[S-155-2023]


Approval of Subzone Status; BlueOval SK LLC; Glendale, Kentucky

    On August 18, 2023, the Executive Secretary of the Foreign-Trade 
Zones (FTZ) Board docketed an application submitted by the Louisville & 
Jefferson County Riverport authority, grantee of FTZ 29, requesting 
subzone status subject to the existing activation limit of FTZ 29, on 
behalf of BlueOval SK LLC, in Glendale, Kentucky.
    The application was processed in accordance with the FTZ Act and 
Regulations, including notice in the Federal Register inviting public 
comment (88 FR 57412, August 23, 2023). The FTZ staff examiner reviewed 
the application and determined that it meets the criteria for approval. 
Pursuant to the authority delegated to the FTZ Board Executive 
Secretary (15 CFR 400.36(f)), the application to establish Subzone 29U 
was approved on October 3, 2023, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's 
regulations, including section 400.13, and further subject to FTZ 29's 
2,000-acre activation limit.

    Dated: October 3, 2023.
Elizabeth Whiteman,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-22306 Filed 10-5-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
Exhibit 4.1


 


Share certificate


 


Certificate no.


 


	Company	 	
        Bendon Group Holdings Limited ACN 619 054 938

        Registered in New South Wales under the Corporations Act
        2001 (Cth)

	 	 	 
	Registered office	 	c/- Hardings Lawyers, Level 3, 1 York Street, Sydney, New South Wales 2000
	 	 	 
	Shares 	 	 
	 	 	 
	Registered holder	 	 


  


is the registered holder of the Shares subject
to the Company’s Constitution and the terms of issue.


 


Executed by


Bendon Group Holdings Limited ACN 619 054 938 by:


 


	 	 	 	 	 
	Ù	Director	 	Ù	Director/Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	Ù	Full name of Director	 	Ù	Full name of Director/Secretary


 






    	48309206v1    |    Share certificate
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Startech Environmental Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Joseph S. Klimek, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.




/s/ Joseph S. Klimek
--------------------
Joseph S. Klimek
Chief Executive Officer, President
September 14, 2004
No. 60274.

Suit 4855.

#### Sandoz Chemical Works, Inc. *v.*United States.

C. D. 1702 affirmed June 20, 1956. C. A. D. 623.
Exhibit 32.2



Certification of the Chief Accounting and Administrative
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 Report of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Seattle (the Bank)
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Christina J. Gehrke, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Bank.



Date: March 28, 2008

|                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                  
|/s/ Christina J. Gehrke                                           
|Christina J. Gehrke                                               
|Senior Vice President, Chief Accounting and Administrative Officer



|* | The Chief Accounting and Administrative Officer for purposes of the Seattle Banks disclosure controls and procedures and internal control of financial reporting performs
similar functions as a principal financial officer.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: TheWasatch plateau coal field, Utah /**
 
Report | Plates: 0614151618192021222325282930313233
 
SuDoc Number:I 19.3:819
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000961238
 
August 21, 2018
smsi-ex10202_230.htm



EXHIBIT 10.20.2

SECOND AMENDMENT TO SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE 

(WILLIAM W. SMITH, JR. AND DIEVA L. SMITH, JT/WROS)

 

This SECOND AMENDMENT TO SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE (this “Amendment”) is made as of March 5, 2018, by and between Smith Micro Software, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and WILLIAM W. SMITH, JR. AND DIEVA L. SMITH, JT/WROS (“Holder”), and amends that certain Secured Promissory Note, dated June 26, 2017, issued by the Company to Holder in the principal amount of $1,000,000, as amended by that certain Amendment to Secured Promissory Note dated January 30, 2018 (the “Note”).  Capitalized terms that are not otherwise defined in this Amendment have the meanings given to such terms in the Note. 

 

RECITALS

 

WHEREAS, the parties desire to extend the Maturity Date of the Note as set forth herein.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:

 

Section 1.  Extension of Note.  Effective as of the date hereof, the Maturity Date of the Note is hereby extended to March 25, 2020.

 

Section 2.  Effect of Amendment.  Except as expressly set forth in this Amendment, no other changes or modifications to the Note are intended or implied by this Amendment.  To the extent of any conflict between the terms of this Amendment and the Note, the terms of this Amendment shall control.  

 

Section 3.  Miscellaneous.  This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, all of which taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument, and any of the parties to this Amendment may execute this Amendment by signing any such counterpart.  Facsimile and electronically copied signatures on this Amendment shall be deemed the equivalent of original signatures.  This Amendment shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and permitted assigns.  

 

[Remainder of page intentionally left blank]

 



EXHIBIT 10.20.2

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed or caused this Amendment to be duly executed by their respective authorized representatives as of the date first written above.

 

COMPANY: 

SMITH MICRO SOFTWARE, INC.

 

By: /s/ Timothy C. Huffmyer

Name:  Timothy C. Huffmyer

Title:  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer

 

HOLDER:

 

 

/s/ William W. Smith, Jr.

William W. Smith, Jr.

 

 

/s/ Dieva L. Smith

Dieva L. Smith
SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATION

I, Michael M. Salerno, certify that:

1. I have reviewed thisAnnualReport on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2008ofLife Nutrition Products, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

Date: March 12, 2010

Signature: /s/ Michael M. Salerno
Name: Michael M. Salerno

Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer & Principal Accounting Officer

---