alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OF OIL STATES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Cindy B. TaylorName:
    Cindy B. TaylorDate:     October 31, 2008
#### A. C. WALKER v. NATIONAL CAR RENTAL et al.

No. 49242.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

March 9, 1977.

C. R. McRae, Robert P. Krebs, Pascagou-la, for appellant.

Megehee, Brown *&*Williams, John M. Kinard, Pascagoula, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; Darwin M. Maples, Judge.

Before PATTERSON, P. J., ROBERTSON and BROOM, JJ., and J. 0. SAMS, Sr., Commissioner.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 41322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20284]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration

19 CFR Part 351


Countervailing Duties

AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration, 
Department of Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public hearing on proposed countervailing duty 
regulations and announcement of opportunity to file post-hearing 
comments; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce published a document in the Federal 
Register of July 21, 1997, announcing a public hearing on the proposed 
countervailing duty regulations. The document contained an incorrect 
date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer A. Yeske at (202) 482-0189.

Correction

    In document 97-19119 beginning on page 38948 in the issue of 
Monday, July 21, 1997, make the following correction:
    On page 38948, in the third column, under the SUMMARY section 
``July 31, 1997'' should read ``August 7, 1997.''
    Dated: July 24, 1997.
Jeffrey P. Bialos,
Acting Assistant Secretary For Import Administration.
[FR Doc. 97-20284 Filed 7-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-M
----

----

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

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

| Date: August 5, 2009                                                                                          |   |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|
|                                                                                                               |   |   |
| /s/ Mark Gatto                                                                                                     |   |   |
| Mark Gatto                                                                                                         |   |   |
| Co-Chief Executive Officer and Co-PresidentICON Capital Corp.General Partner of ICON Income Fund Eight B L.P. |
EXHIBIT 10.9.1 

**Amendment No. 1 to**

**Nobel Learning Communities, Inc.**

**2004 Omnibus Incentive Equity Compensation Plan**

**WHEREAS,**Nobel Learning Communities, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Nobel Learning Communities, Inc. OmnibusIncentive Equity Compensation Plan (the “Plan”), to enable the Company to offer is employees and non-employee directors equity incentives; 

**WHEREAS,**the Plan currently restricts the Company’s ability to grant any form of Awards to the non-employee directors otherthan grants of Options; 

**WHEREAS,** the Board, upon the recommendation of the Compensation Committee of the Board, hasunanimously approved changes to the compensation program for non-employee directors so that such directors will be eligible to receive Stock Awards; 

**WHEREAS**, Article 15 permits the Board of Directors of the Company (“Board”) to amend the Plan at any time; 

**WHEREAS,**the Board desires to amend the Plan to permit to Company to grant any Award Item permitted under the Plan; and

**WHEREAS**, capitalized terms used herein but not defined shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan. 

**NOW, THEREFORE**, effective as of the date hereof, the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 

1. The first sentence of Section 6 “**Eligibility**” is hereby deleted and replaced with the following language:

“Covered Individuals who are Non-Employee Directors shall be eligible to receive the Award Items underSection 8.” 

2. Section 8 “**Grants to Non-Employee Directors**” shall be deleted inits entirety and replaced with the following language: 

“8. **Grants to Non-Employee Directors.**

(a) **Option Grants to New Non-Employee Directors.** Each Non-Employee Director who is not a Non-Employee Director as of theEffective Date shall be granted a Nonqualified Option for 10,000 Shares, on the date on which he or she first becomes a member of the Board. 

(b) **Terms and Conditions of Grants to Non-Employee Directors.** Except as set forth in Section 8(c) or as otherwiseprovided for in the Award Document, each of the terms and conditions set forth in Sections 9(c) through 9(n) shall apply to any Award granted to a Non-Employee Director. 

(c) **Vesting and Forfeiture.** Options granted to Non-Employee Directors shallbecome vested on the last day of the fiscal year that includes the Date of Grant. All other Awards granted to Non-Employee Directors shall vest in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Award Document. In the event that the Recipient ceasesto be a Non-Employee Director without becoming an Employee, any Award that has not yet become vested shall be forfeited. Upon a Change of Control, all outstanding Awards shall become fully vested.” 

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF,** the Plan is hereby amended this8th day of November, 2007 

 
NOBEL LEARNING COMMUNITIES, INCBy: /s/ George Bernstein George Bernstein Chief Executive Officer
#### LYNN STRICKLAND/GCR TRUCK TIRE CENTER and Gallagher-Bassett Services, Inc., Appellants, v. Kenneth PIKE, Appellee.

No. 97-4239.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 29, 1998.

Mary E. Cruickshank and Jacquelyn L. Newman of DuBois & Cruickshank, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellants.

Barry Silber of Barry Silber, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded with directions that the judge of compensation claims dismiss the petition for benefits without prejudice to the filing of a subsequent petition for permanent total disability benefits if the facts warrant. *See Advanced Employment Concepts v. Resmondo,*718 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). *See also City of Pensacola Firefighters v. Oswald,*710 So.2d 95 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BOOTH, BENTON and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                    LETTER RE CHANGE IN ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLE



                                                                     EXHIBIT 18


August 6, 2002



Mr. Gregory D. Waller
Vice President, Finance
Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc.
1717 West Collins Avenue
Orange, California 92867


Dear Greg:

We have been furnished with a copy of the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of
Sybron Dental Specialties, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the Company) for the three and
nine months ended June 30, 2002, and have read the Company's statements
contained in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included therein.
As stated in Note 2, the Company changed its method of accounting for its
domestic inventories from the last-in, first out (LIFO) method to the first-in,
first-out (FIFO) method and states that the change in accounting principle is
preferable in the circumstances because under the current economic environment
of low inflation, it will result in a better measurement of operating results.
In addition, the Company believes that the change in the method of accounting
for domestic inventory costs is preferable because it provides a better measure
of the current value of its inventory, provides a more accurate reflection of
the Company's financial position and liquidity, and provides a better matching
of manufacturing costs with revenues. It will also allow for the valuing of
inventory consistently throughout the Company. In accordance with your request,
we have reviewed and discussed with Company officials the circumstances and
business judgement and planning upon which the decision to make this change in
the method of accounting was based.

We have not audited any financial statements of the Company as of any date or
for any period subsequent to September 30, 2001, nor have we audited the
information set forth in the aforementioned Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements; accordingly, we do not express an opinion concerning the factual
information contained therein.

With regard to the aforementioned accounting change, authoritative criteria have
not been established for evaluating the preferability of one acceptable method
of accounting over another acceptable method. However, for purposes of Sybron
Dental Specialties, Inc.'s compliance with the requirements of the Securities
and Exchange Commission, we are furnishing this letter.

Based on our review and discussion, with reliance on management's business
judgment and planning, we concur that the change in the method of accounting is
preferable in the Company's circumstances.


                                Very truly yours,


                                KPMG LLP
(Reap. Dec. 9142)

#### Edward S. Zerwekh Co. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. DE 26914; DE 27176.

(Decided May 1, 1958)

*Lawrence & Tuttle (George B. Tuttle, Jr.,*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General *(Bichará E. FitzGibbon,*trial attorney), for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

These appeals for reappraisement have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> 1) As to the merchandise covered by the invoices in these eases, the market value or price at the time of exportation at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale for home consumption to all purchasers in the principal markets of France, the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, 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, was the appraised unit value plus packing, as shown on the invoices in red ink, and that there was no higher export value for such or similar merchandise as that here involved at the time of exportation thereof.

> *8082) These cases may be deemed to be submitted on the foregoing agreed facts.

On the agreed facts, I find and hold that foreign value, as such value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (c)), is the proper basis for determining the value of the merchandise covered by the involved invoices, and that such value in each case is represented by the appraised unit value, plus packing, as shown on the invoice in red ink.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
#### Commonwealth *v.*One Buick Roadster.

*Motor vehicles*— Condemnation—Illegal *transportation of liquor— Right of chattel mortgagee*— Act *of March*27, *1928, P. L. 81¡.*

In a proceeding under the Act of March 27, 1923, P. L. 34, for the condemnation and sale of a motor vehicle used in the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor, the holder of a chattel mortgage recorded in another state, is not entitled, under Section 11 of the Act, to payment of the mortgage debt out of the proceeds of the sale, although the mortgagee knew nothing of the illegal use of the car.

Argued March 8, 1926.

Appeal No. 120, April T., 1926, by General Motors Acceptance Corporation from decree of Q. S. Butler County, September Sessions, 1925, M. S. D. No. 4, in the case of Commonwealth v. One Buick Roadster.

Before Porter, P. J., Henderson, Trexler, Keller, Linn, Gawthrop and Cunningham, JJ.

Affirmed.

Petition for condemnation, forfeiture and sale of a motor vehicle used for transporting intoxicating liquors. B'efore Henninger, P. J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Superior Court.

*25The court dismissed the petition of the mortgagee. Mortgagee appealed.

*Error assigned*was the order of the court.

*J. Campbell Brandon,*and with him *F. Clair Ross*and *W. D. Brandon,*for appellant.

*W. B. Purvis,*and with him *Thomas W. Watson,*District Attorney, for appellee.

April 19, 1926:

Opinion by

Linn, J.,

This appeal is from an order in a proceeding to condemn an automobile taken from parties engaged in the illegal transportation of intoxicating liquor. The driver of the car pleaded guilty. The Commonwealth filed a petition for the condemnation, forfeiture and sale of the car pursuant to section 11 of the act of March 27,1923, P. L. 34. To that petition, the General Motors Acceptance Corporation of Ohio, appeared and filed an answer, averring that it was the holder of a chattel mortgage given by one Forrester by which it was interested in said car as a lien creditor; that a balance of $1227.50 remained owing on said debt, and that it claimed to be entitled to share in the proceeds of the sale under section 11 of the statute. The court made an order of sale as prayed for, and the car was sold for $1,000. The General Motors Acceptance Corporation then filed its petition setting forth the proceedings had, denying knowledge of the illegal use of the car, and praying that the net proceeds of the sale be paid to it on account of the chattel mortgage debt. Testimony was taken. A representative of petitioner testified that petitioner knew nothing about the illegal use of the car. The mortgage was recorded in Lorain County, Ohio. The court dismissed the petition. The holder of the chattel mortgage now appeals and contends that section 11 authorizes payment on the debt. *26The decision below was correct for reasons stated in Commonwealth v. One Studebaker Light Six Coupe, 86 Pa. Superior Ct. 532, which need not now be repeated.

Order ‘affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                      EXHIBIT 14

Maxicare Health Plans, Inc.
Code of Ethics

We maintain a code of ethics that applies to our principal executive officer,
principal financial officer, controller, or persons performing similar
functions. Any waiver of the code must be approved by the Audit Committee and
must be disclosed in accordance with SEC rules.

Policy:

A goal of Maxicare Health Plans, Inc. and its subsidiaries is to promote
professional and ethical conduct with respect to our business practices. This
policy provides ethical standards to which all of our executive officers,
including our principal executive, financial and accounting officers, our
directors, and employees are expected to adhere.

Our Policy is to:

         (1)      comply with laws and regulations of applicable national,
                  state, and local governments and regulatory agencies;

         (2)      prepare and develop all information and data in a manner that
                  facilitates full, fair, accurate, complete, timely and
                  understandable and relevant disclosure in reports and
                  documents that we file with, or submit to, the Securities and
                  Exchange Commission and any other government agencies or that
                  we use in other public communications;

         (3)      act with honesty and integrity, avoiding conflicts of interest
                  between our personal and professional relationships.

         (4)      act always in good faith, responsibly, with due care,
                  competence and thoroughness, without misrepresenting material
                  facts or allowing our independent, professional judgment to be
                  compromised;

         (5)      Maintain the confidentiality of information acquired, except
                  when authorized or otherwise legally obligated to disclose
                  such information, and to refrain from using confidential
                  information acquired for personal advantage;

         (6)      exercise responsible use of and control over all of our assets
                  and resources.

         We are committed to complying with both the letter and the spirit of
all applicable laws, rules and regulations. Any information you may have
concerning any violation of this Code of Ethics should be brought to the
attention of the Audit Committee. The Board of Directors may determine, or
designate appropriate persons to determine, appropriate additional disciplinary
or other actions to be taken in the event of violations of this Code of Ethics.

         If you provide information to the Audit Committee, it will be treated
in confidence. Communications to the Audit Committee should be sent to the
attention of: Simon Whitmey, c/o Maxicare Health Plans, Inc., 11231 South La
Cienega Boulevard, Los Angeles, California 90045.
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-06-00439- CV The Ci tyof C e darP ar k, A ppe lla nt

v. Kir k Anthon y, Appellee F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 250TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. GN403437 , HO NORAB LE STEPH EN YELENO SKY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E MO R

A N D UM O P I N I O N Ap pe lla nt, the City

of Ce dar P ark, h a s f

ile d a n uno pp os e d mo tio n to dis mis s th is a pp e a l. We g ra

nt i ts m oti on

and dis mis s th is a

pp e a l.

G. Alan Waldrop, Just ice Be fore J ustices Puryear , Pemberton and Waldrop Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: September

19, 2006
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1943 

To amend section 513 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to 

expedite the process for requesting de novo classification of a device. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 5, 2011 

Mr. BROWN of Massachusetts (for himself and Ms. AYOTTE) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To amend section 513 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to expedite the process for requesting de novo 

classification of a device. 

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 ‘‘Novel Device Regu5 latory Relief Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF DE NOVO APPLICATION PROC7 ESS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.— 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1943 IS

1 (1) DE NOVO CLASSIFICATION.—Section 

2 513(f)(2)(A) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cos3 metic Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)(A)) is amended— 

4 (A) by striking ‘‘(A) Any person’’ and in5 serting ‘‘(A)(i) Any person’’; and 

6 (B) by inserting after ‘‘classification.’’ the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(ii) A person may submit a request under clause (i) 

9 without regard to whether such person has received writ10 ten notice of classification into class III under paragraph 

11 (1).’’. 

12 (2) OPTION FOR INITIAL CLASSIFICATION.— 

13 Section 513(f)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

14 Cosmetic Act (22 U.S.C. 360c(f)(2)) is amended— 

15 (A) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as 

16 subparagraph (D); and 

17 (B) by inserting after subparagraph (B) 

18 the following: 

19 ‘‘(C)(i) Any person that is required to submit a report 

20 under section 510(k) with respect to a device, and deter21 mines that there is no legally marketed device upon which 

22 to base a determination of substantial equivalence (as such 

23 term is defined in subsection (i)), may submit a request 

24 for initial classification of the device under this subpara25 graph. Subject to clause (ii), the Secretary shall classify 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1943 IS

1 the device under the criteria set forth in subparagraphs 

2 (A) through (C) of subsection (a)(1). The person submit3 ting the request for classification under this subparagraph 

4 may recommend to the Secretary a classification for the 

5 device. 

6 ‘‘(ii) The Secretary may decline to undertake a classi7 fication request submitted under clause (i) when the Sec8 retary identifies a legally marketed device that would per9 mit a determination of substantial equivalence under para10 graph (1).’’. 

11 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 513(f)(1) 

12 of such Act (21 U.S.C. 360c(f)(1)) is amended— 

13 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘or’’ at 

14 the end; 

15 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period 

16 and inserting ‘‘; or’’; and 

17 (3) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol18 lowing: 

19 ‘‘(C) the device is classified pursuant to a 

20 request submitted under paragraph (2).’’. 

Æ 


PWALKER on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2014315EN.01002901.xml

| 15.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/29

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 19 June 2014 — Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH v ultra air GmbH, Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-450/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Community trade mark - Word mark ultrafilter international - Application for a declaration of invalidity - Abuse of rights))

2014/C 315/45

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH (represented by: N. Siebertz, M. Teworte-Vey and A. Renvert, Rechtsanwälte)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: ultra air GmbH (represented by: C. König, Rechtsanwalt), Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Donaldson Filtration Deutschland GmbH is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 313, 26.10.2013.

1

---
EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION OF
CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
OF OIL STATES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Bradley J. DodsonName:
    Bradley J. DodsonDate:     October 31, 2008
No. 96-5698.

#### Blackiston *v.*Johnson et al.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.