alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 4.3

                               FORM OF TAX NOTICE
                         FOR AWARDS OF RESTRICTED STOCK

<PAGE>

                    TAX NOTICE FOR AWARDS OF RESTRICTED STOCK


         The awards  granted under the Guaranty  Federal  Bancshares,  Inc. 2000
Stock  Compensation  Plan (the "Plan") will be in the form of Common Stock which
shall  vest  in  five  installments  at  the  rate  of 20% of  such  shares  per
installment.  Taxable  compensation equal to the fair market value of the Common
Stock at the date of vesting of each such stock award will be recognized by each
participant in the Plan.

         Federal Tax Consequences of Awards.
         -----------------------------------

         1.       Stock  awarded  under  the Plan is  generally  taxable  to the
                  participant  at the time that such  awards  become 100% vested
                  and non-forfeitable,  based upon the fair market value of such
                  stock at the time of such vesting.  Therefore,  the vesting of
                  stock  as of  February  17,  2001,  and  annually  thereafter,
                  constitutes an tax event.

         2.       A participant  may make an election  pursuant to Section 83(b)
                  of the Internal  Revenue Code  ("Code")  within 30 days of the
                  date of the  transfer of an award to elect to include in gross
                  income for the current  taxable  year the fair market value of
                  such stock as of the date of the  transfer  of an award.  Such
                  election  must be filed  with  the  Internal  Revenue  Service
                  within 30 days of the date of the transfer of the stock award.
                  Therefore,  such an election  may be filed for stock awards to
                  vest at a future date.

         3.       Tax withholding  obligations related to stock awards that vest
                  may be satisfied by the participant paying the Bank (by check)
                  an amount sufficient to satisfy applicable withholding taxes.

         For example,  suppose  that an employee was  scheduled to vest in 1,000
shares  having a fair  market  value  equal  to $20 per  share  ($20,000  in the
aggregate).  Assuming the employee's  liability for  withholding  and employment
taxes totaled 45% of the ordinary income being recognized,  the amount necessary
to pay such taxes would be 45% of $20,000 or $9,000.  The employee  will pay the
Bank $9,000. The employee would recognize $20,000 of ordinary income.

         For individuals who are subject to the short-swing  profit rule imposed
under Section 16 of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, if shares are withheld
in  satisfaction  of the  withholding  taxes  then  such  withholding  should be
reported on a Form 4 or 5 to be filed with the SEC.
#### Charles B. Chrystal Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 8041.

Entered at New York, N. Y.

Entry No. 713897.

(Decided August 20, 1951)

*Lane & Wallace (William H. Fox*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(Daniel I. Auster,*special attorney), for the defendant.

*426Johnson, Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement involves the value found by the appraiser on 300 bags (66,300 pounds) of talc imported from Manchuria. It was invoiced at United States $0.97 per 100 pounds and entered at the same price, less nondutiable charges. The appraiser found the value to be Japanese yen 46 per ton net, packed.

At the hearing counsel for the plaintiff submitted the case on the record without the introduction of any evidence. From an examination of the papers in this case I find that the value returned by the appraiser, which is presumptively correct, has not been overcome.Judgment will be entered accordingly in favor of the defendant.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v. JAMES F. CRAWFORD, Private E-2, U. S. Army, Appellant

4 USCMA 701, 16 CMR 275

No. 5372

Decided September 24, 1954

Maj Edwin Doran, U. S. Army, and Capt Glade F. Flake, U. S. Army, for Appellant.

Lt Col William R. Ward, U. S. Army, and 1st Lt Benjamin C. Flanna-gan, U. S. Army, for Appellee.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam:

Upon approval of his conviction of desertion as well as of the sentence to dishonorable discharge, total forfeitures and confinement at hard labor for three years, by a board of review, the accused petitioned this Court to determine the sufficiency of the evidence to support the finding of apprehension.

The sole evidence of this element of the offense is in the form of a stipulation of the expected testimony of Agent G. Gillen, Federal Bureau of Investigation, entered into by the parties, which we set out in full:

> “My name is G. Gillen and I am an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and was such agent at the time herein mentioned. On 3 May 1954 at 2215 hours, I apprehended the accused herein, Private James F. Crawford, RA 18 365 871, on the street at 6449 Smith Yale in Chicago, Illinois. The accused neither surrendered, requested that he be apprehended, nor voluntarily initiated his being apprehended.”

This stipulation is substantially the same as those with which we were concerned in United States v. Beninate, 4 *702USCMA 98, 15 CMR 98; United States v. Cowans, 4 USCMA 308, 15 CMR 308, and United States v. Salter, 4 USCMA 338, 15 CMR 338. In each of the cited cases we held the stipulation insufficient proof of termination of desertion by apprehension.

No material difference is found in the fact that in the instant case the accused was apprehended by an agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, whereas in the cited cases state or local authorities were involved. Article 8, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 50 USC § 562. Agents of that Bureau are authorized to apprehend individuals for violations of Federal laws other than encompassed by the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Such an apprehension does not operate to terminate an unauthorized absence from one of the armed forces. Termination results only from a return to military control. In the case at bar, whether the accused’s return to military control was voluntary or involuntary was not shown. Nor can involuntariness be inferred from a showing that he returned to military control one hour and forty-five minutes after his apprehension by Agent Gillen.

The finding of apprehension is set aside. The case is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for submission to a board of review for redetermination of an appropriate sentence.
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.
 Small Business Administration [Disaster Declaration # 10851]
 AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.
 ACTION: Notice.
 SUMMARY: This is a Notice of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for Public Assistance Only for the State of Maine (FEMA-1691-DR), dated 4/20/2007. *Incident:*
                         Flooding. *Incident Period:*
                         3/16/2007 through 3/18/2007.
 DATES: *Effective Date:*
                         4/20/2007. *Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*
                         6/19/2007.
 ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to:  U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road,  Fort Worth, TX 76155.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of the President's major disaster declaration on 4/20/2007, Private Non-Profit organizations that provide essential services of a governmental nature may file disaster loan applications at the address listed above or other locally announced locations. The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected by the disaster: *Primary Counties:* Hancock, Knox, Lincoln, Waldo. *The Interest Rates are:* PercentOther (Including Non-Profit Organizations) with Credit Available Elsewhere
5.250Businesses And Non-Profit Organizations without Credit Available Elsewhere
4.000
 The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 10851. Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008). Herbert L. Mitchell, Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance.


[FR Doc. E7-8247 Filed 4-30-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
NUMBER 13-23-00152-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOSIE LEE LOZA, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court

of Live Oak County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Benavides

This cause is before the court on appellant’s motion to dismiss. Counsel for 

appellant and the appellant signed the motion. Furthermore, the appellant signed an

attached affidavit. We find the motion and affidavit together meet the requirement of 

Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) that appellant and attorney must sign a written 

motion to dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Without passing on the merits 
2

of the case, we grant the motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal. 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant's request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained.

GINA M. BENAVIDES

Justice

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b). 

Delivered and filed on the

18th day of May, 2023.
**
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
(Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)  
I, Glenn F. Tilton, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officerof United Air Lines, Inc. (the "Company") certify that to the best of myknowledge, based upon a review of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe period ended June 30, 2004 of the Company (the "Report"): (1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and (2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofthe Company.    /s/ Glenn F. TiltonGlenn F. TiltonUnited Air Lines, Inc.Chairman, President and Chief Executive OfficerJuly 28, 2004  

**
(Logo)TORCHLIGHT

** **

** **

**ANNUAL COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

CERTIFICATION

GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2016-GS, CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates,

Series 2016-GS2 (the “Trust”)

I, Jacob Baron, onbehalf of  Torchlight Loan Services, LLC, as General Special Servicer (the“Certifying Servicer”), certify to GS Mortgage Securities Corporation II andeach Other Depositor and their respective officers, directors and affiliates,and with the knowledge and intent that they will rely upon this certification,that:

 

1. I (or ServicingOfficers under my supervision) have reviewed the Certifying Servicer’sactivities for the fiscal year 2017 (the “Reporting Period”) and the CertifyingServicer’s performance under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement; and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Certifying Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement in all materialrespects throughout the Reporting Period. 

 

Capitalizedterms used but not defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Poolingand Servicing Agreement.

 

Date:February 28, 2018

TORCHLIGHT LOANSERVICES, LLC, as General

SpecialServicer

 

By: /s/ Jacob Baron

Name: Jacob Baron

Title:Authorized Signatory
IIA 

109TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 32 

Disapproving the results of the review conducted by the Committee on Foreign 

Investment in the United States (CFIUS) into the purchase of Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (P&O) by Dubai Ports World 

(DP World). 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2006 

Ms. COLLINS introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice 

and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Disapproving the results of the review conducted by the 

Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States 

(CFIUS) into the purchase of Peninsular and Oriental 

Steam Navigation (P&O) by Dubai Ports World (DP 

World). 

Whereas on February 13, 2006, the shareholders of the London-based Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation (referred to in this resolution as ‘‘P&O’’) approved the acquisition of P&O by Dubai Ports World (referred to in 

this resolution as ‘‘DP World’’) for $6,800,000,000; 

Whereas the transaction transfers P&O North America operations at 21 United States ports, including leasing agreements for terminal operations in New York, Newark, 

Baltimore, New Orleans, Miami, and Philadelphia; 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
2 

•SJ 32 IS

Whereas ensuring the security of United States port operations is critical to our Nation’s economic vitality and to 

national security; 

Whereas DP World is owned by the Government of Dubai, 

part of the United Arab Emirates; 

Whereas the United Arab Emirates, while our ally in the war 

on terrorism, has been used as a base for terrorist operations and financing, including in the planning of the attacks of September 11, 2001; 

Whereas the 12 member Committee on Foreign Investment 

in the United States (referred to in this resolution as 

‘‘CFIUS’’) conducted a review of the transaction within 

30 days of formal notification and declined to open an investigation, issuing a statement of no objection to the 

sale on January 17, 2006; and 

Whereas Congress was not informed of or consulted with regarding this transaction and any potential national security implications: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives 

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That Congress— 

4 (1) disapproves the CFIUS review of the trans5 action referred to in this resolution; 

6 (2) directs CFIUS to withdraw its statement of 

7 no objection related to the transaction referred to in 

8 this resolution and to conduct a 45-day investiga9 tion, pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Produc10 tion Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. App. 2170) in order to 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
3 

•SJ 32 IS

1 ensure that the sale described in this resolution will 

2 not have an adverse effect on national security; and 

3 (3) directs CFIUS to brief Members of Con4 gress on the findings of its investigation before the 

5 transaction is allowed to proceed. 

Æ 


ccoleman on PROD1PC71 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       2,349,542
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,526,387
<ALLOWANCES>                                    72,667
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             5,404,703
<PP&E>                                      21,301,693
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,880,545
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              28,922,944
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,538,879
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,101,196
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,373,883
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                28,922,944
<SALES>                                      9,014,790
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             9,014,790
<CGS>                                        4,959,409
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,959,409
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             307,445
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,285,388
<INCOME-TAX>                                   821,931
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,463,457
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,463,457
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        

</TABLE>
No.48740.

#### Protest 102628-K of Oxford University Press, N. Y., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

It was conceded by stipulation of counsel that the books in question consist of medical books wholly of bona fide foreign authorship. The claim was therefore sustained.
114 STAT. 1310 PUBLIC LAW 106–336—OCT. 19, 2000

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4484:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

Sept. 6, considered and passed House.

Oct. 6, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–336

106th Congress

An Act

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 500 North

Washington Street in Rockville, Maryland, as the ‘‘Everett Alvarez, Jr. Post

Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

500 North Washington Street in Rockville, Maryland, shall be

known and designated as the ‘‘Everett Alvarez, Jr. Post Office

Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Everett

Alvarez, Jr. Post Office Building’’.

Approved October 19, 2000.

Oct. 19, 2000

[H.R. 4484]
Case No. 13,979.

#### THOMPSON et al v. VOSS.

[1 Cranch. C. C. 108.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term, 1802.

Wbit or Error — Supersedeas—Agreement.

A writ of error is not a supersedeas unless served within ten days after the rendition of the judgment, although the parties should have agreed to a stay of execution for two months; and the writ of error should be served before the expiration of that time.

[This was an action by Thompson & V.eiteh against Nicholas Voss.]

Fieri facias. Motion to quash the execution, on the ground that a writ of error had issued, and the plaintiffs had joined in error at the supreme court. The judgment below was signed on the 27th of March, 1802, and the execution was, by consent, stayed two months, before the expiration of which time viz., on the 19th of May. the writ of error was filed; and bond given and citation issued. On the 28th of May, a ca. sa. returnable to July term, was issued, but did not go out of the office. On the 8th of September. 1802, the fieri facias issued returnable to December term. At the supreme court of the United States in August. 1802, the defendants in error appeared and joined issue on the assignment of errors.

THE COURT

refused to quash the execution, being of opinion That the writ of error is not a supersedeas, unless served by a *1098copy thereof, being lodged for the adverse •party in the clerk’s office where the record remains, within ten days, Sundays exclusive, after rendering the judgment. Judiciary Act 1789, § 23 (1 Stat. 85).
No. 53792.

protests 144668-K, etc. (New York).

#### Amcu Trading Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         I, Gordon R. Arnold,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that the
quarterly report of Sierra Monitor  Corporation on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2003 fully complies with the  requirements of Section
13(a) or  15(d)  of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934 and that  information
contained  in such  quarterly  report  on Form  10-QSB  fairly  presents  in all
material  respects the  financial  condition and results of operations of Sierra
Monitor Corporation.

         A signed original of this written statement  required by section 906 or
other document authentication, 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  Sierra  Monitor
Corporation and will be retained by Sierra Monitor  Corporation and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


Date:  November 8, 2003                   By: /s/ Gordon R. Arnold
                                              ---------------------------
                                              Gordon R. Arnold
                                              Chief Executive Officer
                                              Chief Financial Officer

                                                                   Page 17 of 17
(Reap. Dec. 8838)

#### Crownford China Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

Entry No. 744130, etc.

(Decided June 13, 1957)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiffs.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Johnson, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule *“A,”*hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the attorneys for the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the merchandise covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated in the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof, consists of ohinaware imported from Germany.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the appraised values of the merchandise covered by the Appeals to Reappraisements enumerated on the schedule attached hereto and made a part hereof less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the Appraiser in similar cases, is equal to the market value or the price at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States including the cost of all containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges, and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition, packed ready for shipment to the United States and that there was no higher foreign value for such or similar merchandise.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the cases may be submitted on the forgoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) 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 the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.