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



Exhibit 10.1







AMENDMENT TO CONTRACT #4600368806 between Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras and Dril Quip do Brasil Ltda.


Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras, society of mixed economy, with headquarters in the city of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro State, the 1120 Republic of Chile, 65, entered in the National Register of Legal Entities under the n the 33,000.167/0001-01, hereinafter referred to as the Petrobras, and Dril Quip do Brasil Ltda., with headquarters in the road of Imboassica, 853, Imboassica, Macaé, State of Rio de Janeiro, entered in the National Register of Legal Entities under the n. 03,432.310/0001-73, hereinafter referred to as the Contractor, have each other just and agreed to amend the Contract #4600368806, subject to the following terms and conditions:


FIRST CLAUSE - OBJECT


1.1.     This amendment has the following object:


1.1.1.     to extend the contractual deadline, without any inflow of funds.


SECOND CLAUSE - AMENDMENT


2.1.     extend from 06/08/2016, inclusive, the contractual deadline set forth in item 1.13 of clause 1a - Term and duration, of the contract by an additional 90 calendar days without inflow of funds, with a new expiration date of 27/10/2016.


2.2. To     change the item 1.13 of the contract, which shall come into force with the following.


"1.13.     The term of this agreement will last for 1,530 days, with permission of renewal of period by up to the equivalent period in common agreement."


THIRD CLAUSE - DURATION


3.1.     This amendment becomes effective upon signature.


FOURTH CLAUSE - RATIFICATION


4.1.     The parties ratify the other conditions set forth in the contract/Carta-Contrato 4600368806 and its amendments, which are not expressly modified by this instrument.


And by being fair and agreed upon, the parties sign this amendment along with the witnesses below.




/s/ Eduardo Antonio de Souza     
Eduardo Antonio de Souza
Petroleo Brasileiro S.A. - Petrobras
Date: 29/7/2016


/s/ Fife Ellis                                  
Fife Ellis
DRIL QUIP DO BRASIL LTDA.
Date: 27/7/2016
Exhibit 32.2





KINDER MORGAN, INC.

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 Annual Report of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.





|Dated:  June
  1, 2005 |  | /s/ Kimberly J. Allen                                       
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  | Kimberly J. Allen
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer







---

---
EX-10.A



 Exhibit 10 (a) 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 







 CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement on Form N-4 of our reports dated April 25, 2016 and
April 27, 2016, relating to the financial statements of Separate Account VA B and Separate Account VA BNY, respectively, and our reports dated April 25, 2016 and April 27, 2016, relating to the financial statements of Transamerica
Life Insurance Company and Transamerica Financial Life Insurance Company, respectively, which appear in Separate Account VA B’s Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 to the Registration Statement on Form N-4 (No. 333-185573). We also consent to
the reference to us under the heading “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Separate Account VA B’s Post-Effective Amendment No. 7 to the Registration Statement on Form N-4 (No. 333-185573). 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 
 Chicago, Illinois 

October 31, 2016 







 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Statement of Additional Information
and to the use of our reports: (1) dated February 6, 2015, with respect to the statutory-basis financial statements and schedules of Transamerica Financial Life Insurance Company, (2) dated April 25, 2016, with respect to the
statutory-basis financial statements and schedules of Transamerica Life Insurance Company incorporated by reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 8 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4, No. 333-185573) and related Prospectuses of
Transamerica Variable Annuity Series and Members Variable Annuity Series. 
 /s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Des Moines, IA 
 October 31, 2016
No. 62537.

#### Scandinavian Design et al. *v.*United States,

protests 327721-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of chairs similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Davies Turner & Co.*v. *United States*(45 C. C. P. A. 39, C. A. D. 669), the claim at 19 percent under the provision in paragraph 412, as modified, *supra,*for “Furniture, * * * Chairs,” was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of furniture the same as that in C. A. D. 669, *supra,*were held dutiable at 11)4 percent under the provision in said paragraph 412, as modified, *supra,*for other furniture.
body {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	color: #333333;	margin: 0px;	padding: 0px;	height: 100%;	width: 100%;}td {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	color: #333333;}p {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	color: #333333;}dd {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	color: #666666;	margin-left: 10pt;}dt {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #000066;}.larger {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 11pt;	font-weight: bold;}.caption {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;	text-align: center;}a.white {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;	color: #EEEEEE;	text-decoration: none;}a.white:hover {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;	color: #FFFFFF;	text-decoration: underline;}.white-text {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;	color: #EEEEEE;}.drop-box {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;}h1 {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 16pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #990000;}h2 {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 14pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #006699;}.largecap {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 12pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #990000;}.darkred-header {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 11pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #990000;}address {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	font-style: normal;}.selected {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #990000;}.burg-bold {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 10pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #000066;}h3 {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 13pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #666666;}.name {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 11pt;	font-weight: bold;	color: #006633;}li {	line-height: 20px;	margin-left: -20px;}.indexletter {	font-size: 16pt;	color: #666666;}.indented {	text-indent: 30px;}h4 {	font-weight: bold;	color: #006699;	font-size: 11pt;}ul {	list-style-type: square;	margin-top: 0;	margin-bottom: 0;}.ML-text {	font-size: 12pt;}.ML-smaller {	font-size: 9pt;}.ML-black {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	color: #000000;	font-size: 10pt;}.ML-years {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 12pt;}.new {	font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;	font-size: 9pt;	font-style: italic;	color: #FF0000;	font-weight: normal;}
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4601 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a consolidated communication facility at Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, 

Georgia. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 20, 2024 

Mr. OSSOFF introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To authorize the appropriation of amounts for the construction of a consolidated communication facility at Marine 

Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘MCLB Albany Innova5 tion Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 4601 IS

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF AMOUNTS FOR CONSTRUCTION 

2 OF A CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATION FA3 CILITY AT MARINE CORPS LOGISTICS BASE 

4 ALBANY, GEORGIA. 

5 There is authorized to be appropriated to the Sec6 retary of Defense for fiscal year 2025 $64,100,000 for the 

7 construction of a consolidated communication facility at 

8 Marine Corps Logistics Base Albany, Georgia. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A18A0120. OMATAYO A. IDOWU v. NORTH AMERICAN SPECIALTY

INSURANCE COMPANY.

In this breach of contract action, the trial court entered a consent order

awarding damages to the plaintiff on May 17, 2016. On June 30, 2016, Omatayo

Idowu filed a notice of appeal to this Court. We lack jurisdiction.

A notice of appeal must be filed within 30 days of entry of the order sought to

be appealed. OCGA § 5-6-38 (a). The proper and timely filing of a notice of appeal

is an absolute requirement to confer jurisdiction on this Court. Rowland v. State, 264

Ga. 872, 872 (1) (452 SE2d 756) (1995). Idowu’s notice of appeal is untimely, as it

was filed 44 days after entry of the judgment against him. Consequently, this appeal

is hereby DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

September 06, 2017

09/06/2017
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF JACOBSON STORES INC. AND CONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARIES
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 29, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                 <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR
<CASH>                                      722
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                            32,701
<ALLOWANCES>                                559
<INVENTORY>                              91,905
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        131,735
<PP&E>                                  180,199
<DEPRECIATION>                           97,036
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          233,664
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    63,742
<BONDS>                                  85,772
<COMMON>                                  5,975
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                               68,468
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            233,664
<SALES>                                 448,075
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        448,075
<CGS>                                   296,412
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           296,412
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            793
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        7,277
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           5,394
<INCOME-TAX>                              1,888
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       3,506
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                              3,506
<EPS-BASIC>                              0.61
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.61


</TABLE>
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
128409 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 128409 COA: 260383

JAMES E. CORBETT, Defendant-Appellant. Wayne CC: 76-636725 93-500022

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal th e February 3, 2005 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENI ED, because the defendant’s motion for relief from ju dgment is prohibited by MCR 6.502(G).

s1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk
No. 59559.

protest 248337-K (New York).

#### C. F. Eccardt & Co. *v.*United States,

Ekwall, Judge:

This case involves an importation of champagne from France. It has been submitted upon the official papers, including the collector’s letter of transmittal. From the record as thus made, it is apparent that the collector of customs at the port of entry assessed duty upon the wine at the rate of $2 per gallon under paragraph 803 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1001, par. 802), as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (82 Treas. Dee. 305, T. D. 51802). The rate of duty on champagne at the date of entry here *346involved, i. e., June 9, 1950, was dependent upon the. value per gallon; if valued at not more than $6 per gallon, the rate was fixed at $2 per gallon; if valued at $6 per gallon, at $1.50 per gallon. Plaintiff claims that the $1.50 rate is applicable.

The invoice shows that the contents of the 102 cases involved consisted of about 248.88 gallons, or 2.44 gallons per case. The entered and appraised value of the champagne, per se, is shown to be $14.65 per case, less $0.66 per case for the bottles, or $13.99. $13.99 divided by 2.44 results in a valuation of $5.73 per gallon. The appraiser accepted the entered value and found the value of the champagne to be less than $6 per gallon. No appeal from that finding of value was taken.

In determining the value, it appears that the appraiser followed the decision of this court in the case of *Maynard & Child*v. *United States,*24 Cust. Ct. 215, C. D. 1235. Appeal from that decision (suit 4649) was dismissed on stipulation. It was there held that sparkling wine imported in bottles was properly dutiable upon the basis of the value of the wine *per se,*exclusive of the cost of the bottles.

In the instant case, the collector assessed duty upon the appraised value. That value, in the absence of an appeal, is final. (Section 503, Tariff Act of 1930 (19 ü. S. C. § 1503).)

We find no evidence of error in the collector’s action. Plaintiff’s claims are, therefore, overruled. Judgment will be rendered for the defendant.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
EXCHANGE ACT RULE 15d-14(b) AND
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

          In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Bliss
Essentials Corp. ("Registrant") for the period ending September 30, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Howard Gelfand, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, and Secretary
of Registrant, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Exchange Act
Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 Registrant.

          A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,
or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Bliss Essentials
Corp. and will be retained by Bliss Essentials Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



Date:  November 12, 2004             /s/ Howard Gelfand
                                     ----------------------------------
                                     Chief Financial Officer of
                                     Bliss Essentials Corp., Registrant
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with AmendmentNo. 1 to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of EnerNOC, Inc. (the “Company”),for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Amended Report”), the undersigned, TimothyG. Healy, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuantto Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code, that:

(1)The Amended Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)The information contained in the Amended Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.

Date: October 29, 2007
|   |   |   | By:    | /s/ Timothy G. Healy    |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |   |   |   | Timothy G. Healy        |
|   |   |   |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to EnerNOC,Inc. and will be retained by EnerNOC, Inc. and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
(Reap. Dec. 10409)

#### Studebaker-Packard Corp. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 23521; 26201; 29440.

(Decided December 27, 1962)

*Barnes, Richardson & Colburn*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph D. Quilfoyle,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed on schedule “A,” attached to this decision and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows;

> 1. That on or about the dates of exportation of the merchandise involved herein, such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale in the country of exportation for home consumption or for exportation to the United States.

> 2. That on or about the said dates of exportation, such or similar imported merchandise was not freely offered for sale for domestic consumption in the United States.

> 3. That the cost of production as defined in Section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, of the automobiles involved herein is as stated on Schedule “A” annexed.

> 4. That with regard to automobiles not identified on said Schedule “A,” the proper dutiable value is the appraised value.

> 5. That the involved appeals may be submitted on this stipulation, the same being limited to the merchandise and issues described herein and abandoned in all other respects.

On the agreed facts, I find cost of production, as that value is defined in section 402(f) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the automobiles identified on said schedule “A” and that such values were as thereon stated. As to all other automobiles, not so identified, I find the values returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
September 18, 2015

Mr. William Granruth

President

Osprey Imaging, LLC

261 Mill Street

Greenwich, CT 06830

Dear Mr. Granruth:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your petition for an exemption from 

§§ 45.23(b), 61.113(a) and (b), 91.7(a), 91.9(b), 91.103(b), 91.105, 91.109, 91.119, 91.121, 

91.151(a), 91.203(a) and (b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(2), 91.417(a) and (b), and 

part 21, Subpart H, of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we 

can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We received your May 19, 2015, exemption request on behalf of Osprey Imaging, LLC filed 

in Docket No. FAA−2015−2080, but we are unable to process your request any further. Your 

petition does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider 

the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

For more detailed information relating to submitting petitions for exemption, please visit 

http://aes.faa.gov/petition/index.html. This website helps the petitioner to meet Federal 

Aviation Administration (FAA) requirement outlines in § 11.81 and helps answer any 

questions you may have.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must submit the requested information 

within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption 

at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. 
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions you may call the 333 Information Line (202) 267-2999.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brittany Newton

Program Analyst, Airmen and

Airspace Rules Division

Enclosures
3
4
14910-13-PI

14 erR Part 39

DEPARTMENT OF TRAi'lSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

0(01/4

[Docket No. FAA-2010-*****j Directorate l~entifier 2009-NM-204-ADj

I

RIN 2120-AA64

Airn'orthiness Directives; Airbus Model AJOO 84-600 Series Airplanes; Model

A300 B4-600R Series Airplanes; Model A300 C4-GOSR Variant F Airplanes; and Mo

A300 F4-60SR Airplanes

AGENCY: Federal Aviation AdministTation (FAA), DOT.

I

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulcmaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the produc

- A0Y

lURE

~

~5:/'7'lcJ

I~m.oLSrsJG>'. TUAE

C&&..r---

~V'10

o

+N~1'I·O~ ?r"M'o~

'"'"* [Failure of the frame base], ifnot corrected, could affect the

structural integrity of the fuselage.

Within the framework of the A300-600 aircraft Service Life Extension

programme (42 500 Fe), it has been concluded that a reinforcement of the

junction of frame bases at FR48, FR49 and FRS I to FRS3 is necessary to

enable the aircraft to reach the Extended Service Goal (ESG).

infonnation (MeAT) originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify

listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness

and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation produc\. The MeAl describes the unsa

condition as:

* * * *j * * *

The proposed AD would require actions that a e intended to address the unsafe condit

described in the MeAl.

FAA Form 1360-14.1 (6-89) OFFICIAL FIlE COPY * u.s. GOV£RNMENT PfIlNTlNG OFFICE: 1995·769-211