alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.26



Description of Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Awards



On April 26, 2005, the Board of Directors of the Company adopted and approved a plan by which each non-employee director would receive:



| | (1) | for each in-person meeting of the Board that such director attended, a number of shares of restricted stock with an aggregate fair market value of $1,500, and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | for each telephonic meeting of the Board that such director attended, a number of shares of restricted stock with an aggregate fair market value of $500.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



The shares of restricted stock would be granted pursuant to the Companys 1998 Stock
Plan. Such shares of restricted stock would be granted once per year at the first regular meeting of the Board held following the end of the Companys fiscal year, and the fair market value and aggregate number of the restricted shares shall be
determined at such meeting in accordance with the Companys 1998 Stock Plan. Non-employee directors who attended meetings of the Board during the previous fiscal year but who are no longer directors on the date that such restricted stock is
granted will not be eligible to receive such grants. The plan will be effective for each meeting of the Board held on or after January 1, 2005. For example, at the first regular meeting of the Board held following June 30, 2005, a director of the
Company on the date of such meeting will receive shares of restricted stock in the amounts set forth above for each in-person or telephonic meeting of the Board held on or after January 1, 2005 that such director attended.
##### 



KYLE TINGLE, CPA
P.O. Box 50141
Henderson, Nevada 89016
(702) 434-8452
(702) 436-4218 fax

|                        |               
|----------------------- | --------------
|To Whom It May Concern: | April 10, 2002

The firm of Kyle Tingle, Certified Public Accountant consents to the inclusion
of his report of April 10, 2002, on the Financial Statements of Huile Oil &
Gas, Inc., as at December 31, 2001, in any filings that are necessary now or in
the future with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Kyle Tingle

Kyle Tingle
Certified Public Accountant
#### In the Matter of Gabriel S., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[700 NYS2d 720]

—In a juvenile delinquency proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 3, the appeal is from an order of disposition of the Family Court, Richmond County (Clark, J.), dated September 8, 1998, which, upon a fact-finding order of the same court, dated July 31, 1998, made after a hearing, finding that the appellant committed acts which, if committed by an adult, would have constituted the crime of sodomy in the first degree (two counts), adjudged him to be a juvenile delinquent, and placed him on probation for 18 months. The appeal brings up for review the fact-finding order dated July 31, 1998.

*314Ordered that the order of disposition is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the presentment agency *(cf., People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant committed the acts with which he was charged. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the Family Court’s findings of fact were not against the weight of the credible evidence *(see,*Family Ct Act § 342.2 [2]).

The Family Court properly found that the victim, who was six years old at the time of trial, could be sworn as a witness. The thorough voir dire revealed that he was aware of a moral duty to tell the truth and the adverse consequences of failing to do so *(see, People v Schultz,*168 AD2d 468). S. Miller, J. P., Altman, Schmidt and Smith, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of IWT Tesoro Corporation (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005, as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Henry J. Boucher, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

Theforegoing certification shall not be deemed to be filed for the purposes of Section 18of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to liabilityunder this section.  This certificationshall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under theSecurities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act except to the extent that this Exhibit 32.1is expressly incorporated by reference in any such filing.

 
| Dated: May 13, 2005 | /s/Henry J. Boucher, Jr. |   |
|--------------------------|-------------------------------|--------|
|                     | Henry J. Boucher, Jr.    |
|                     | Chief Executive Officer       |

 

A signed original of this written statementrequired by 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 has been provided to the Company andwill be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

----
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 China BAK Battery, Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report). I, Li Xiangqian,
Chief Executive Officer 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 result of
                  operations of the Company.


By: /s/ Li Xiangqian
-----------------------
Li Xiangqian
Chief Executive Officer
May 13, 2005
#### STATE ex rel Gregory ALCINDOR v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 98-KH-1890.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 15, 1999.

IN RE: Gregory Aleindor; Plaintiff; Applying for Reconsideration of this Court’s Order dated November- 13, 1998; Parish of Orleans Criminal District Court Number 319,267 Division “J”; to the Court of Appeal Fourth Circuit Number 98KW-1313

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J., not on panel.
No. 96-6752.

#### Aranda-Hernandez *v.*United States.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
SIBLING
ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, INC.(A Development Stage Company) Exhibit
32.2 Certification
by the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Sibling
Entertainment Group, Inc. (the Company) on the Form 10-KSB/A for the
period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, James S. Cardwell, Chief Financial
Officer 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: (i) the Report filed by the Company fully complies with
the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and (ii) The information contained in that Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company on the dates and for the periods presented therein. SIBLING ENTERTAINMENT GROUP, INC.Date: October 17, 2006
By:
/s/ James S. CardwellJames S. CardwellChief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting
  Officer 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. 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 the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request. 40
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1719 

To clarify that schools and local educational agencies participating in the 

school lunch program under the Richard B. Russell National School 

Lunch Act are authorized to donate excess food to local food banks 

or charitable organizations. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 17, 2011 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To clarify that schools and local educational agencies participating in the school lunch program under the Richard 

B. Russell National School Lunch Act are authorized 

to donate excess food to local food banks or charitable 

organizations. 

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 ‘‘School Food Recovery 

5 Act’’. 


SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1719 IS

1 SEC. 2. FOOD DONATION PROGRAM. 

2 Section 9 of the Richard B. Russell National School 

3 Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758) is amended by adding at the 

4 end the following: 

5 ‘‘(l) FOOD DONATION PROGRAM.— 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Each school and local edu7 cational agency participating in the school lunch 

8 program under this Act may donate any food not 

9 consumed under such program to eligible local food 

10 banks or charitable organizations. 

11 ‘‘(2) GUIDANCE.— 

12 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 

13 days after the date of the enactment of this 

14 subsection, the Secretary shall develop and pub15 lish guidance to schools and local educational 

16 agencies participating in the school lunch pro17 gram under this Act to assist such schools and 

18 local educational agencies in donating food 

19 under this subsection. 

20 ‘‘(B) UPDATES.—The Secretary shall up21 date such guidance as necessary. 

22 ‘‘(3) LIABILITY.—Any school or local edu23 cational agency making donations pursuant to this 

24 subsection shall be exempt from civil and criminal li25 ability to the extent provided under the Bill EmerVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:38 Oct 18, 2011 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1719.IS S1719

SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1719 IS

1 son Good Samaritan Food Donation Act (42 U.S.C. 

2 1791). 

3 ‘‘(4) DEFINITION.—In this subsection, the term 

4 ‘eligible local food banks or charitable organizations’ 

5 means any food bank or charitable organization 

6 which is exempt from tax under section 501(c)(3) of 

7 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26 U.S.C. 

8 501(c)(3)).’’. 

Æ 


SMARTINEZ on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### International Forwarding Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6535.

Entry No. 728462, etc.

Invoices dated Wealdstone, England, October 30, 1941, etc.

Certified November 1, 1941, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., December 6, 1941, etc.

(Decided November 19, 1946)

*Jordan & Klingaman*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Cole, Judge

(Abstract): These appeals for reappraisement of Various items of merchandise concern the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48.” The said tax was held not to be an item to be included in foreign value as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (c)). *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. 183, C. A. D. 334.

Undisputed facts establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the instant merchandise is export value, section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. 1940 ed. § 1402 (d)), and that such statutory values for the articles in question are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T GA BR I EL PONCE- RODRI GU EZ , P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 70059 A ge nc yN o. A 091- 115- 690 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r19, 2010 ** B efo re: O ’ S C A N N L A IN , T A L L M A N , an dB E A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. G abr i e l P onc e - R odr i gue z , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r o m an i mmi g r a t i o n j u d g e ’ s r e mo v a l o r d e r . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r8 U . S. C. § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o q u e s tio n s o f law an dc o n s titu tio n a l c la im s . A v i la

# FI LED OC T 25 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 70059 2 Sa nchez v . Mukasey , 509 F . 3d 1037, 1040 ( 9th C i r . 2007) . W e de nythe pe t i t i on f o rr e v i e w. B e c aus e P onc e - R odr i gue z ’ s June 18, 1996, de port at i on or de rw a s l aw f ul w hen h e w as depo rt ed and the re cord re veal s thathi s w ai ver of app ea l of thatorder w a s “c o n s id e r e dan din te llig e n t,” th e B I A d idn o t e rrin c o n c lu d in g th a t h e f a ile dto de m ons tr a t e a“ gr os s m i s c arr i a ge of j us t i c e a tthe pr i orpr oc e e di ng” and he th e r e f o r e m ayn o t, a t th is p o in t, c o lla te r a llya tta c kh is 1 9 9 6 d e p o rta tio n o r d e r . Ra m i r ez -J

u a r ezv . I NS , 6 3 3 F .2 d1 7 4 , 1 7 5 - 7 6 ( 9 th C ir . 1 9 8 0 ) ( p e rc u r ia m ) ; see a l so A lv a r e n g a - V

illa lo b o s v . A s h c r o

ft , 2 7 1 F .3 d1 1 6 9 , 1 1 7 2 - 7 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 ) ; B i w otv. G on zales , 403 F . 3d 1094, 1098 ( 9th C i r . 2005) ( w a i ve rof r i ghtt o appe a l m us tbe

“ consi dere d and i nt el l i gent ”) . W e r e j e c tPo n c e - Ro d r i g u e z ’ s c o n s t i tu t i o n a l c h a l l e n g e t o 8 C. F. R. § 1 0 0 3 .4 4 ( k ) ( 2 ) . See A vi la-Sa nchez , 509 F . 3d a t1040- 41. P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
#### Eliza TURNER and Willie Bean v. The PARISH OF JEFFERSON, through the DEPARTMENT OF RECREATION, Houma Motels, Inc. D/B/A Holiday Inn Holidome, ABC Insurance Company and XYZ Insurance Company.

No. 98-C-2859.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 8, 1999.

In re Houma Motels Inc. d/b/a; Holiday Inn Holidome; — Defendant(s); applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; Parish of Jefferson, 24th Judicial District Court, Div. “G”, No. 490-569; to the Court of Appeal, Fifth Circuit, No. 98-CA-0336.

Denied.

CALOGERO, C.J. not on panel.

VICTORY and TRAYLOR, JJ., would grant the writ.
```

[115th Congress Public Law 225]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 1624]]

Public Law 115-225
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
     To extend the National Flood Insurance Program, and for other 
             purposes. <<NOTE: July 31, 2018 -  [S. 1182]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, <<NOTE: National Flood 
Insurance Program Extension Act of 2018. 42 USC 4001 note.>> 
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Flood Insurance Program 
Extension Act of 2018''.
SEC. 2. PROGRAM EXTENSION.

    (a) Financing.--Section 1309(a) of the National Flood Insurance Act 
of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4016(a)) is amended by striking ``September 30, 
2017'' and inserting ``November 30, 2018''.
    (b) Program Expiration.--Section 1319 of the National Flood 
Insurance Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4026) is amended by striking 
``September 30, 2017'' and inserting ``November 30, 2018''.

    Approved July 31, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 1182:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD:
                                                        Vol. 163 (2017):
                                    Aug. 3, considered and passed 
                                        Senate.
                                                        Vol. 164 (2018):
                                    July 24, 25, considered and passed 
                                        House, amended.
                                    July 31, Senate concurred in House 
                                        amendments.

                                  <all>
```
APHIS Factsheet

Biotechnology Regulatory Services July 2012

Monsanto’s Modified 

Oil Soybean (Event 

MON 87769)

 APHIS received a petition from Monsanto, in July 

2009, seeking a determination of nonregulated status 

for MON 87769 developed to increase the levels of 

the omega-3 fatty acid, stearidonic acid.

 In a notice published in the Federal Register

on December 27, 2011, APHIS announced the 

availability of the Monsanto petition, a draft plant pest 

risk assessment (PPRA), and a draft environmental 

assessment (EA) for public comment. APHIS 

solicited comments on all these documents for 60 

days ending on February 27, 2012. APHIS received 

226 comments during the comment period.

 APHIS has determined that MON 87769 is 

unlikely to pose a plant pest risk to agricultural 

crops and other plants and plant products. APHIS’ 

determination is based on 1) the Agency’s analysis 

of available scientific data, 2) its evaluation of data 

submitted by the Monsanto Company in its petition 

for a determination of nonregulated status, and 3) 

comments received from the public in response to 

our previous notice announcing the availability of the 

petition for nonregulated status and its associated 

EA and PPRA. 

 Under the Plant Protection Act and APHIS’ 

regulations, the Agency is specifically required to 

evaluate if the modified oil soybean variety is a plant 

pest to agricultural crops or other plants or plant 

products. The Act defines a plant pest as organisms, 

such as bacteria, fungi, or insects that can cause 

harm to agricultural crops or other plants or plant 

products. 

Q: What is stearodonic acid?

A: Stearidonic acid is an omega-3 fatty acid that 

helps to prevent a wide variety of adverse health 

conditions and is not typically found in soybean oil. 

Q: Is this product intended for human 

consumption?

A: Yes. Monsanto submitted to FDA a food and feed 

safety and nutritional assessment for event MON 

87769. It is currently under review at FDA.

Q: Has Soybean MON 87769 been field tested in 

the U.S.?

A: Yes, it has been field tested in the major soybean 

growing regions of the continental United States. 

All field tests were conducted under field permits, 

including strict movement controls, granted by USDA 

APHIS.

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

United States Department of Agriculture • Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service • Safeguarding American Agriculture
Exhibit 32.1   WorldNet, Inc. of Nevada  CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 18 U.S.C. Section 1350  The undersigned executive officer of WorldNet, Inc. of Nevada certifies pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:  a. the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of WorldNet, Inc. of Nevada for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  b. the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of WorldNet, Inc. of Nevada.  Date:  October 29, 2009/s/ Donald R. Mayer
Donald R. Mayer
Principal Executive Officer
Principal Financial Officer
ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION * In the

OF MARYLAND

* Court of Appeals

* of Maryland

 v.

* Misc. Docket AG No. 14,

 

GILBERT BABER * September Term, 2015

 

 

O R D E R

This matter, having come before the Court upon the filing of a Petition for 

Disciplinary or Remedial Action and request for interim suspension pursuant to Maryland 

Rule 16-773(d), with attached certified copy of an opinion of the District of Columbia 

Court of Appeals dated January 15, 2015, disbarring Respondent, Gilbert Baber, from the 

practice of law in the District of Columbia; and it appearing that Gilbert Baber is also a 

member of the Bar of this Court; it is this 13th day of May, 2015,

ORDERED, by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, that Respondent, Gilbert 

Baber, be, and he is hereby, indefinitely suspended, effective immediately, from the 

further practice of law in the State of Maryland, pending further order of this Court, 

pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-773(d); and it is further,

ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court shall strike the name Gilbert Baber from 

the register of attorneys, pursuant to Maryland Rule 16-760(e), shall certify that fact to the 

Trustees of the Client Protection Fund and the clerks of all judicial tribunals in the State.

 

/s/ Mary Ellen Barbera

Chief Judge