alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex_350206.htm


 


Exhibit 4.1


 


DESCRIPTION OF REGISTRANT’S SECURITIES 


REGISTERED PURSUANT TO SECTION 12 OF THE 


SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934


 


 


The Reserve Petroleum Company (the “Company”) has one class of security registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: the Company’s common stock.


 


DESCRIPTION OF COMMON STOCK


 


The following summary of the terms of the Company’s common stock is based upon its Restated Certificate of Incorporation (the "Certificate of Incorporation") and Amended Bylaws (the “Bylaws”). This summary is not complete and is qualified by reference to the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws, each of which is incorporated by reference as an exhibit to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of which this Exhibit 4.1 is a part.


 


General


 


Pursuant to the Certificate of Incorporation, the Company is authorized to issue 200,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.50 per share.


 


Dividends


 


Our board of directors may declare, at its discretion, dividends payable in cash or shares of the Company to the extent permitted by applicable law.


 


Voting Rights


 


Each holder of shares of our common stock is entitled to one vote for each share held on all questions submitted to a vote at a meeting of shareholders. There are no cumulative voting rights in the election of directors.


 


A majority of the votes cast is required for all actions to be taken by shareholders, except with respect to director elections, which requires a plurality of the votes cast.


 


Upon any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of the Company, holders of its common stock are entitled to share equally and ratably in any assets remaining after the payment of all debt and other liabilities.


 


Trading


 


The Company’s common stock is traded in the Pink Sheet Quotation Service and the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol “RSRV.”


 


Board of Directors


 


Our board of directors shall consist of not less than three (3) or more than fifteen (15) directors. We currently have nine (9) directors.


 


Anti-Takeover Effects of Certain Provisions


 


Certain provisions of the Company's Certificate of Incorporation and its Bylaws summarized in the paragraphs above and in the following paragraphs may have an anti-takeover effect. It is possible that these provisions could make it more difficult to accomplish or could deter transactions that shareholders may otherwise consider to be in their best interest or in the best interests of the Company, including transactions that might result in a premium over the market price for shares of the Company's common stock.


 


Special Shareholder Meetings


 


Unless otherwise permitted by applicable law, the Company's Bylaws provides that special meetings of shareholders may be called only by (i) the Board, (ii) the Chairman of the Board, (iii) the President or (iv) the Board upon the written request of shareholders holding a majority of all the votes entitled to be cast on each issue to be considered at the special meeting as of the date of submission of the request.
NRRIT 

Annual Management Report 

for Fiscal Year 2015 
 
NRRIT 

National Railroad Retirement 

Investment Trust 

Annual Management Report for Fiscal Year 2015 

Required by Public Law 107-90, 

The Railroad Retirement and Survivors’ 

Improvement Act of 2001 

 


 

12. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS 

The Trust has evaluated subsequent events through November 13, 2015, the date these financial 

statements were issued, and determined that there were no subsequent events requiring adjustments 

to or disclosure in the financial statements. 

*****
 

27
Exhibit 31.2


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Paul Spector, certify that,

(1) I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10Q of Aris Industries, 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;

(3) Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

(4) The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

(b) (Intentionally omitted)

(c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and


<PAGE>


(5) The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

(a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize, and report financial information; and

(b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the Company's internal controls over
financial reporting;

Date:  May 18, 2004


/s/ Paul Spector
    Chief Financial Officer
RECORD OF DECISION ATTACHMENT B:

DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR

SECTION 4(f) CONCURRENCE
# C_2016078EN.01001104.xml

| 29.2.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 78/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.2.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 78/11

---

Order of the President of the Court of 30 November 2015 — European Commission v Romania

(Case C-366/15) (1)

1

(2016/C 078/17)

Language of the case: Romanian

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 346, 19.10.2015.

1

---
# C_2016343EN.01001301.xml

| 19.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 343/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 343/13

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 June 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato — Italy) — Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato v Italsempione — Spedizioni Internazionali SpA

(Case C-450/15) (1)

1

((Preliminary reference - Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Article 23(2)(a) - Interpretation in the light of the principle of proportionality - Determination of the amount of the fine - Criteria - Guidelines for the calculation of fines - National practice - Adjustment of the basic amount of the fine - Account to be taken of aggravating or extenuating circumstances - Application of the maximum limit of 10 % of total turnover - Absence of jurisdiction of the Court - Manifest lack of jurisdiction))

(2016/C 343/19)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato

Applicant:

Defendant: Italsempione — Spedizioni Internazionali SpA

Defendant:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court manifestly lacks jurisdiction to reply to the request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Consiglio di Stato (Council of State, Italy) by decision of 16 June 2015.

---

(1)  OJ C 381, 16.11.2015

1

---
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

Lower Colorado 

Auzail, Taxar 

Oentlemb 

River Authority 

A 

Your the 

Authority haa entered lnt sales cant 0 dth 

the Central Paver 67 Light v . vhioh oontraot provider 

ed aa of Juu 19, 1940, 

csipt4, aad pole rental 

valomm, groer re- 

"80 that the Company rha 

orated and a&j-ted 

apportionable to the part 

0 pay only the tax 

o 

har4 elapred 

yearuhloh ahall 

You adobe that 

the purohate II 

1941, 

be ooneummated on 

nareh 15, 

oontrwt prop0 

partier to the 

aontr.sot vhlohtill 

proride in sub 

c 

d to the Authority 

r4m tsxeu, grorr retax48 for the year 

eyed, the Authority 

eharmlers the Compeny, 

fromand agalmtthe 

8tly Oi S&d taxer 

1 upon all of the properties r0r 

of taxer ha8 been made a8 aforeire that the question har been raised a8 to 

\ drether thlr agreement upon the part ot the Authorlty vould 

be valid, In rier of our letter of November 22, 1940. 

Our letter of Xorember 22, 1940, related to an BAtimely different slfxatfon. 

a8risting oertaln 00untl4s, 

There, your Authority van deriroua of 

8ohool diatriotr and UlUIliCiptiiti48 
Lover Colorado River Authority, Psgs 2 

by voluntarily assuming the obligation to ompensate auoh 

oounties, sohoo~ distPi4t8 and munioipalltlee to the extent 

of ths amount of taxes formerly paid thetn on properties belonging to the Texar Pover b Li@ Company and oonveyed by 

sald,oompany to th4,kuthorlty by deed dated September 1, 

1931. 

%The Aot oreatlng oh4 Authority oonf’em upon It 

the right to aopulre, by purohaue, any aud all property of 

any klnd,'real, perronal or mixed, vlthln or vlthout the 

bound&w148 of the district, n4oessaz-y or oonvenient to the 

exeroire of the povors, rlghtr, prlvilegsr snd funotionr 

aonierred upon the Authority by the hot. The agreement lnoolved In the In&ant 4a8e 18 an ex4outlon of ruoh paver, 

a&d the agreement relating to the prorsttng of tax48 upon 

the properties purchased for the year 1941 has to do vith 

the consideration to be paid for the propertlea purohassd, 

affording, in effect, a mea8ure by vhioh a oertain portion 

of the aonaideratlon to be pald for the propertlea by the 

Authority is to be determined. The element of gratuitous 

payment, involved and oonaldered ln our letter of November 

22, 1940, sir ab84nt in this rltuation. It Is our opinion 

that the Authority has the povsr to enter into the agreement 

for prorating the taxes, upon the properties to be acquired 

by pumhas4 by the Authority from the Central Pover k Light 

Company, for th4 year 1941. 

Yours very truly 

ATTORXRY ORXRRAL OF TEXA!3 

R. W. Fairchild 

AsLasistaDt 

RUF:db
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7384

BARRY L. RHODES, Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; CHARLES M. CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South Carolina, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, District Judge. (CA-99-1541-0-17BD) Submitted: February 24, 2000 Decided: March 3, 2000 Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Barry L. Rhodes, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Barry L. Rhodes seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1999). Rhodes’ case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Rhodes that failure to file specific objections to this recommendation could waiveappellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Rhodes failed to specifically object to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to so object will waive appellate review. See Orpiano v. Johnson , 687 F.3d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Rhodes has waived appellate review by failing to direct the district court tospecific errors in the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Rhodes filed only general, conclusory objections. We therefore deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We further deny Rhodes’ motion for preparation of a transcript at government expense. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-3 rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    This quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the first quarter ended June 27, 2009 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the first quarter
ended June 27, 2009 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of Transcat, Inc.
 Date:  August 7, 2009
    /s/ Charles P. HadeedCharles P. HadeedChief Executive Officer, President and Chief Operating OfficerDate:  August 7, 2009
    /s/ John J. ZimmerJohn J. ZimmerVice President of Finance and Chief Financial Officer
No. 53179.

#### The Otto Gerdau Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 124657-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the issues and facts are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspectors as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation and following the decision cited it was held that the merchandise, insofar as it involves the quantities reported by the inspectors as “manifested, not found,” is subject to an allowance in duties. The protests were sustained to this extent.
<PAGE> 1

EXHIBIT 32a

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 Twin Disc, Incorporated (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending December 31, 2004, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Michael E. Batten, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

    (1)    the Report fully complies with Section 13(a) 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/ MICHAEL E. BATTEN
                                     Michael E. Batten
                                     Chairman, Chief Executive Officer

				     February 7,  2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS
OF SEPTEMBER 30,2000 AND FOR THE NINE-MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000100122
<NAME> TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,712,637
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                     68,705
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         254,358
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       446,521
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                  77,115
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,559,336
<COMMON>                                       641,521
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          (337,739)
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 303,782
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,132,395
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                    1,725
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    852,303
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                25,797
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 243,334
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,559,336
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      752,694
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             7,944
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     594,948
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     602,892
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        149,802
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               8,585
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 158,387
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       125,251
<NET-INCOME>                                    33,136
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                   33,136
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                         138,703
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0




</TABLE>
```

                                                                    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 NYFIX,  Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-Q/A for the period  ending  June 30,  2003 as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Mark R. Hahn,  Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to
the best of my knowledge, 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/ Mark R. Hahn
------------------------------
Mark R. Hahn
Chief Financial Officer
May 28, 2004

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

This  certification  accompanies  this  Report  pursuant  to Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and  shall not be deemed  filed by the  Company  for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
```
(Reap. Dec. 8381)

Entry No. 744758, etc.

#### Charles H. Hornburg, Jr., et al. *v.*United States

(Decided January 12, 1955)

*Lawrence & Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*Warren E. Burger,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon an agreed statement of facts entered into by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto.

On the agreed facts I find the 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 merchandise here involved, and that such values were as set forth in schedule *“A,”*hereto attached and made a part hereof.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 19

- 00617

- CV

In re Ragina Christine Thompson

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator Ragina Christine Thompson has filed a petition for writ of man damus

complaining of the trial court ’ s te mporary orders related to child custo dy, visitation, and child

support. Having reviewed the record and relator ’ s arguments, we deny the petition for writ of

mandamus. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8(a).

_____________ _____________________________ Jeff Rose, Chief Justice

Before C hief Justice Rose, Justices Ba ker and Triana

Filed: Mar ch 11, 2020
EX-10.1




 Exhibit 10.1 
  


			
	 Sheila J. Rostiac
 Senior Vice President
– Human Resources
 Chief Human Resources Officer & Chief Diversity Officer
	  	 Human Resources
 80 Park Plaza, T4,
Newark, NJ 07102
 tel: 973-430-6047

email: sheila.rostiac@pseg.com


  
 



 
 April 18, 2022 

Ralph Izzo 
 In Care Of PSEG 

Dear Ralph: 
 On behalf of the PSEG Board of
Directors (the “Board”), I am pleased to confirm your new position as Executive Chair – PSEG, effective September 1, 2022, at which time you will cease to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer- PSEG. You will continue to
be an executive employee of PSEG Services Corporation. 
 As Executive Chair, you will continue to report directly to the Board and serve as
Chairman of the Board. Your duties as Executive Chair will be determined by the Board, but are expected to include continued focus on energy policy, other strategic matters important to the company, and assisting Ralph LaRossa in the leadership
transition. 
 There are no changes to any of your existing compensation arrangements associated with this position change, and any other
employment terms and conditions remain in place. You agree that you are not entitled to any severance compensation or benefits in connection with your transition to Executive Chair as of September 1, 2022, or your last day of employment on
December 31, 2022. You agree to resign from all positions with PSEG (including as Executive Chair and a member of the Board) effective as of December 31, 2022, and you will provide PSEG with any documentation necessary to effectuate these
resignations. 
 If the foregoing is in accordance with your understanding, please sign this letter and return to me. 

 

	
	Sincerely,
	
	/s/ Sheila J. Rostiac
	Sheila J. Rostiac
	Senior Vice President – Human Resources
	Chief Human Resources Officer and Chief Diversity Officer


  

	
	Agreed to this 18th day of April, 2022.
	
	 /s/ Ralph Izzo

	Ralph Izzo
Memorandum to file From: Nancy Levin

Date: 5

- 29

- 2015 Subject: Phone call with Bob Downing, Maricopa Country Air Quality District In a phone call with Nancy Levin, EPA, Region 9, Bob Downing confirmed that there are no point sources in the Pinal part of the Phoenix

- Mesa nonattainment area.