alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
      10.29

     

    GENERAL
      FINANCE CORPORATION

     

    Compensation
      of Non-Employee Directors

     

    Effective
      as of September 13, 2007

     

    The
      Board
      of Directors approved the following compensation for non-employee directors
      at
      its meeting held September 11, 2007 based upon recommendations from the
      Compensation Committee, effective upon consummation of the acquisition of RWA
      Holdings Pty Ltd. Directors who are also employees of the Company receive no
      additional compensation for service as a director.

     

    
      	
              Type
                of Compensation

            	 	
              Cash

            	 
	
              Annual
                Retainer

            	 	
              $

            	
              30,000

            	 
	
              Additional
                Annual Retainer - Chairman of the Board

            	 	
              $

            	
              10,000

            	 
	
              Additional
                Annual Retainer - Audit Committee Chairman

            	 	
              $

            	
              10,000

            	 
	
              Additional
                Annual Retainer - Compensation Committee Chairman

            	 	
              $

            	
              7,500

            	 
	
              Additional
                Annual Retainer - Nominating Committee Chairman

            	 	
              $

            	
              3,000

            	 
	
              Board
                Meeting Attendance Fee - Chairman

            	 	
              $

            	
              2,000

            	 
	
              Board
                Meeting Attendance Fee - Non-Chairman

            	 	
              $

            	
              1,500

            	 
	
              Committee
                Meeting Attendance Fee

            	 	
              $

            	
              750

            	 
	
              Telephonic
                Meeting Attendance Fee

            	 	
              $

            	
              500

            	 


    

    


    Retainers
      are paid in advance, 50% on June 30 and 50% on December 31 of each year, and
      are
      non-recoupable upon termination of service as a director. The retainer for
      the
      period ending December 31, 2007 will be prorated from September 13,
      2007.

     

    The
      Board
      will consider the grant of options to a director upon initial appointment and
      upon re-election. 

     

    The
      Company will reimburse directors for reasonable expenses incurred while
      attending board and committee meetings (including telephone expenses for
      telephonic meetings). 

     

    Directors
      may defer all or part of their retainer and meeting attendance fees until the
      termination of their service as a director by advance notice to the Company,
      consistent with applicable law and regulations.
#### Donald LANE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2134.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 20, 1977.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Thomas G. Murray, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

*195Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Anthony C. Musto, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Edwin D. Davis, II, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and HAVER-FIELD, J., and DREW, E. HARRIS (Ret.), Associate Judge.

PER CURIAM.

Donald Lane appeals his conviction for robbery, loitering and prowling.

Defendant first urges as reversible error the court’s denial of his motion to suppress his confession on the ground it was involuntary as he was under the influence of drugs at the time.

The determination of the issue of the voluntariness of a confession is for the trial court whose province it is to adjudge the credibility of the witnesses and the weight of the evidence. *Von Horn v. State,*334 So.2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). This determination must be supported by substantial competent evidence. *Melero*v. *State,*306 So.2d 603 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). After reviewing the record, we find that there was competent substantial evidence to sustain the trial court’s conclusion that defendant’s confession was freely and voluntarily given and he knowingly waived his constitutional rights. In fact, defendant’s written confession reflects that he was in complete control of his mental faculties at the time he wrote it.

Defendant next contends that the prosecutor in opening argument and a prosecution witness made statements which allegedly alluded to the fact that he had remained silent when he was first detained by the police and questioned about the robbery.

Although at first glance it appears that these statements made reference to defendant’s exercising his right to remain silent, when viewed and read in their proper context, it becomes readily apparent that these remarks were referring to defendant’s exculpatory statements denying any participation in the robbery.

Defendant’s last point is based upon allegedly improper prosecutorial comments made during opening argument.

We note that defense counsel failed to object to these comments and, therefore, this point should not be considered on appeal. See *Thomas*v. *State,*326 So.2d 413 (Fla.1975). We further find the statements were proper as a prosecutor may outline the facts which he, in good faith, expects to prove and which are competent for him to prove. See *Paul v. State,*209 So.2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).

Affirmed.
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 Annual Report of Intercom  Systems,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the period  ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  (the  "Report"),  each  of  the  undersigned,  in the
capacities and on the dates indicated  below,  hereby  certifies  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

1.   the Report fully complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   the information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.


Dated: September 30, 2003               By: /s/  Robert H. Donehew
                                           -----------------------
                                             Robert H. Donehew
                                             acting Chairman, acting President,
                                             Vice President, Treasurer and
                                             Director (Principal Executive
                                             and Financial Officer)
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Annual Report of Ironstone Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

      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 operation
            of the Company.

Date: March 24, 2005                         /s/ Robert H. Hambrecht
                                             -----------------------------
                                             Name: Robert H. Hambrecht
                                             Title: Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authentications, 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 Ironstone Group, Inc.
and will be retained by Ironstone Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[111th Congress Public Law 124]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[[Page 123 STAT. 3484]]

Public Law 111-124
111th Congress

                                 An Act

 
  To extend the Generalized System of Preferences and the Andean Trade 
 Preference Act, and for other purposes. <<NOTE: Dec. 28, 2009 -  [H.R. 
                                4284]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF GENERALIZED SYSTEM OF PREFERENCES.

    Section 505 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2465) is amended by 
striking ``December 31, 2009'' and inserting ``December 31, 2010''.
SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF ANDEAN TRADE PREFERENCE ACT.

    (a) Extension.--Section 208(a) of the Andean Trade Preference Act 
(19 U.S.C. 3206(a)) is amended in paragraphs (1) and (2) by striking 
``December 31, 2009'' each place it appears and inserting ``December 31, 
2010''.
    (b) Treatment of Certain Apparel Articles.--Section 204(b)(3) of the 
Andean Trade Preference Act (19 U.S.C. 3203(b)(3)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (B)--
                    (A) in clause (iii)--
                          (i) in subclause (II), by striking ``7 
                      succeeding 1-year periods'' and inserting ``8 
                      succeeding 1-year periods''; and
                          (ii) in subclause (III)(bb), by striking ``and 
                      for the succeeding 2-year period'' and inserting 
                      ``and for the succeeding 3-year period''; and
                    (B) in clause (v)(II), by striking ``6 succeeding 1-
                year periods'' and inserting ``7 succeeding 1-year 
                periods''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (E)(ii)(II), by striking ``December 31, 
        2009'' and inserting ``December 31, 2010''.

    (c) Report.--Section 203(f)(1) of the Andean Trade Preference Act 
(19 U.S.C. 3202(f)(1)) is amended by striking ``April 30, 2003'' and 
inserting ``June 30, 2010''.
SEC. 3. CUSTOMS USER FEES.

    Section 13031(j)(3) of the Consolidated Omnibus Budget 
Reconciliation Act of 1985 (19 U.S.C. 58c(j)(3)) is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``February 14, 2018'' 
        and inserting ``May 14, 2018''; and
            (2) in subparagraph (B)(i), by striking ``February 7, 2018'' 
        and inserting ``June 7, 2018''.

[[Page 123 STAT. 3485]]

SEC. 4. <<NOTE: 26 USC 6655 note.>> TIME FOR PAYMENT OF CORPORATE 
                    ESTIMATED TAXES.

    The percentage under paragraph (1) of section 202(b) of the 
Corporate Estimated Tax Shift Act of 2009 in effect on the date of the 
enactment of this Act is increased by 1.5 percentage points.

    Approved December 28, 2009.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4284:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009):
            Dec. 14, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 22, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
No. 99-7953 (99A670).

#### Sims *v.*Florida.

Sup. Ct. Fla. Application for stay of execution of sentence of death, presented to Justice Kennedy, and by him referred to the Court, denied. Certiorari denied.
#### AMERICAN HEALTH ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Corporation, and William H. Zibell, Appellants, v. Herbert HELPRIN, an Individual, Health Association of Pembroke Pines, Inc., a Florida Corporation, and Lee Stuart, an Individual, Appellees.

No. 77-2010.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 21, 1978.

*205Coleman R. Rosenfield of Graham, Hodge, Swan & Larson, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

Kim Douglas Sherman of Edwards, Dub-ner, Sherman & Rayson, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees Helprin and Health Association of Pembroke Pines, Inc.

LETTS, Judge.

The opinion filed Febuary 21, 1978, is herewith withdrawn.

The ruling of the trial court denying the motion to dismiss, filed by the appellant at the trial level, is affirmed.

The basis for said motion was that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the person, because the disputed contract contained a clause for arbitration prior to any lawsuit.1 The appellee below argued that even if such were so, the right to arbitration had been waived by the conduct of the appellant.

We do not believe we can reach the merits of this cause. The appellants contend that Fla.App. Rule 4.2 permits interlocutory appeals from pre-trial orders relating to jurisdiction over the person. That is correct, but we disagree that the denial of the instant motion to dismiss was such an ap-pealable order.

To us, jurisdiction over the person, for example, refers to service of process, or the applicability of the long arm statute to non-residents. *Paradis v. Cicero,*167 So.2d 248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). In the case at bar, we perceive the problem to be one of jurisdiction over the subject matter, not reviewable by interlocutory proceeding.

It is true that we could treat this matter as one of common law certiorari, but we believe that there is full, adequate and complete remedy available after final judgment in this case. *Siegal v. Abramowitz,*309 So.2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). It would be both convenient and saving of costly, protracted and possibly useless litigation, if we were to agree to review *all*rulings of trial judges as they occur. However, such is impractical when one considers the resulting logistics of such a course, coupled with those who would immediately subvert it for dilatory purposes.

THE APPEAL IS DISMISSED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.

1

. Although harmless in the light of our conclusion, Article VIII of the contract allegedly containing the arbitration clause was not included in the record on appeal. Thus, we certainly could not have interpreted same.
#### Albertine MILLER v. Henry BROCK.

No. 61368.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Jan. 30, 1978.

In re: Albertine Miller applying for cer-tiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit. Parish of St. James. 352 So.2d 313.

Writ denied.
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Silicon Mountain Holdings, 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):
   Date: April 15, 2009
    /s/ Rudolph (Tré) A. Cates IIIRudolph (Tré) A. Cates III,President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Director
# L_2023157EN.01004601.xml

| 20.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 157/46 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 157/46

---

COUNCIL DECISION (CFSP) 2023/1188

of 19 June 2023

amending Decision 2014/386/CFSP concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and in particular Article 29 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy,

Whereas:

| (1) | On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 23 June 2014, the Council adopted Decision 2014/386/CFSP (1).

| (2) | The Union does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation as a violation of international law. The Union remains steadfast in its commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and dedicated to fully implementing its non-recognition policy. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The Union does not recognise and continues to condemn the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation as a violation of international law. The Union remains steadfast in its commitment to Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognised borders and dedicated to fully implementing its non-recognition policy.

| (3) | On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures set out therein should be renewed until 23 June 2024. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On the basis of a review of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the restrictive measures set out therein should be renewed until 23 June 2024.

| (4) | Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(4)

Decision 2014/386/CFSP should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

In Article 5 of Decision 2014/386/CFSP, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:

‘This Decision shall apply until 23 June 2024.’.

Article 2

This Decision shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Luxembourg, 19 June 2023.

For the Council

The President

E. BUSCH

---

(1)  Council Decision 2014/386/CFSP of 23 June 2014 concerning restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol (OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 70).

1

---
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Vester RANKIN.

No. 60936.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 15, 1977.

In re: Vester Rankin, applying for supervisory review.

Granted.

The petition of the relator in the above entitled and numbered case having been duly considered,

It is ordered that a Writ of Certiorari issue herein, directing the Honorable Henry L. Yelverton, Judge of the 14th Judicial District Court for the Parish of Cameron, to transmit to the Supreme Court of Louisiana, on or before the 29th day of November, 1977, the record in duplicate, or a certified copy of the record in duplicate, of the proceedings complained of by the relator herein, to the end that the validity of said proceedings may be ascertained.

It is further ordered that the aforesaid Judge of said Court and the respondent through counsel shall show cause, in this court, on a date to be fixed by this Court why the relief prayed for in the petition of the relator should not be granted.
# Sherman receives Distinguished Civilian Service Award

/ Published Nov. 23, 2016
Stephen Sherman, the director of Document Services in DLA Information Operations, received the DoD Distinguished Civilian Service Award at a Pentagon ceremony Nov. 3. Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Work presented the award to Sherman and seven other DoD employees.The Distinguished Civilian Service award is the highest recognition a civilian can receive in the DoD,  given to employees whose work has shown exceptional devotion to duty.Sherman has worked for DoD 37 years. He started his career in 1979 with the Navy Publications and Printing Service and stayed through various name changes until the organization came under DLA. It is now a part of Information Operations and known as Document Services.Sherman has spent many years supporting the mission of transforming the DoD from traditional, hardcopy printing to using digital documents in electronic repositories. Since 2006, under his leadership, over 1 billion annual hardcopy prints have been eliminated, a clear cost avoidance for DLA and its external customers.Under Sherman’s watch, Document Services has become a staple in many agencies’ processes for disseminating and preserving their information. Their partnership with the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency brings on-demand maps and other documents to troops. Defense Finance and Accounting Services relies on Document Services’ quick and efficient printing of W-2s and Affordable Care Act notices every year. It has led numerous large scanning jobs to convert paper records into digital files for customers like the U.S. Army Provost Marshall Office and the Naval Facilities Engineering Command.Over the last decade, Sherman has delivered over $500 million in estimated savings to DoD through leading various programs and initiatives.Sherman said his focus on the customer is his primary motivator. He led the implementation of an online ordering system that made it easy for customers to request services from their desks rather than having to physically visit a Document Services facility. Almost 60 percent of order fulfillment is now initiated online, and the number continues to grow. Sherman continues to lead the Department from paper documents to electronic content management services.“To be honored in such a way, you have to be supported over the years by your team. I thank all those who supported my efforts throughout the years,” said Sherman on receiving the award.This isn’t the first time Sherman has been recognized for his dedication throughout the years. He was awarded twice with the Exceptional Civilian Service Award and has also received the Superior and Meritorious Civilian Service Awards.
**Exhibit 99.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEFEXECUTIVE OFFICER**

 

I, Lawrence A. Oberkfell,President, Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman of the Board of SureBeamCorporation (the "Registrant"), do hereby certify in accordance with18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that, based on my knowledge:

 

(1) the Quarterly Reporton Form 10-Q of the Registrant for the period ended September 30, 2002 (the"Report") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

 

(2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

 
| Dated: November 14,  2002 | By:    | /s/  Lawrence A. Oberkfell     |
|---------------------------|--------|-------------------------------------|
|                      |   | Lawrence A. Oberkfell               |
|                      |   | President, Chief  Executive Officer |
|                      |   | and Chairman of the  Board          |