alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 174 (Tuesday, September 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47507]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23740]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Cancer Institute; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Cancer Institute Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) meeting.

    Name of SEP: Preclinical Toxicology and Pharmacology of Drugs 
Developed for Cancer, AIDS and AIDS-Related Illnesses.
    Date: October 6-7, 1997.
    Time: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Place: Holiday Inn, 2 Montgomery Village Avenue, Gaithersburg, 
MD 20879.
    Contact Person: Lalita Palekar, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Administrator, National Cancer Institute, NIH, Executive Plaza 
North, Room 622, 6130 Executive Boulevard, MSC 7410, Bethesda, MD 
20892-7410; Telephone: 301/496-7575.
    Purpose/Agenda: To evaluate and review grant applications.
    The meeting will be closed in accordance with the provisions set 
forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C. 
Applications and the discussions could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Numbers: 93.393, 
Cancer Cause and Prevention Research; 93.394, Cancer Detection and 
Diagnosis Research; 93.395, Cancer Treatment Research; 93.396, 
Cancer Biology Research; 93.397, Cancer Centers Support; 93.398, 
Cancer Research Manpower; 93.399, Cancer Control)

    Dated: September 2, 1997.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 97-23740 Filed 9-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION 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 PACE Health Management Systems, Inc. (the Company)
on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, John Pappajohn, Director and Acting Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 operations of the Company.   /s/   John PappajohnJohn PappajohnDirector and Acting CFOMarch 26, 2004
#### GREENE v. THOMAS.

No. 39024.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 226 So.2d 143.
ex10-1.htm


Exhibit 10.1

 

November 19, 2015

 

Mercantile Bank Corporation

Mercantile Bank of Michigan

310 Leonard St. NW

Grand Rapids, Michigan 49504

 

Re: First Amendment to Employment Agreement dated November 13, 2014

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

This letter confirms our agreement reached today regarding the Employment Agreement dated as of November 13, 2014, by and among you and me (the "Employment Agreement"). We have agreed that all references in the Employment Agreement to my titles as Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of Mercantile Bank Corporation (the "Company") or as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Mercantile Bank of Michigan (the "Bank"), are amended respectively to refer to Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company and Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Bank, to take into account my promotion to Executive Vice President of the Company and the Bank effective January 1, 2016. 

 

Any future changes to my titles for the Company or the Bank will be automatically incorporated into the Employment Agreement without the need for an amendment. 

 

Except as specifically amended by this letter, all of the terms of the Employment Agreement remain in full force and effect. This letter may be executed in counterparts, and is governed by Michigan law.

 

/s/ Charles E. Christmas                  

Charles E. Christmas

 

MERCANTILE BANK CORPORATION

 

 

By: /s/ Michael H. Price                
            Michael H. Price

             Its: Chairman and CEO

 

MERCANTILE BANK OF MICHIGAN

 

By: /s/ Michael H. Price                

            Michael H. Price

            Its: Chairman
#### Alvin S. SHERMAN, Appellant, v. Ernest HERMAN, Trustee, and Dome Property Management, Inc., a Florida corporation, and City of North Miami, Florida, a municipal corporation, Appellees.

Nos. 70-213, 214.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 20, 1970.

*139Smith, Mandler, Smith & Parker and Paul S. Berger, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Frates, Fay, Floyd & Pearson and James D. Little, Miami, Martin D. Kahn, North Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

SWANN, Judge.

A final judgment was signed by the trial judge on February 20, 1970, in a suit in which Alvin S. Sherman was not a party. The final judgment was filed on February 23, 1970, and recorded on February 24, 1970.

On February 24, 1970, Sherman filed a “motion for leave to intervene” as a party defendant in the suit. The motion was denied by the trial judge and he has filed an interlocutory appeal and a petition for writ of certiorari to the order of denial.

We have consolidated those matters and have determined to treat this as an interlocutory appeal from an order entered in a civil action after final judgment. Rule 4.2(a), F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., and Fort v. Fort, Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 69.

Appellees have filed, in this interlocutory appeal, a motion to strike portions of the record and brief filed herein by Sherman. They assert that those portions of the record and brief allude to certain pleadings and a writ involved in a separate cer-tiorari proceeding filed by Sherman in another division of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida and those pleadings were not a part of the evidence or records before the trial judge in this cause. A certificate of the Clerk of the Circuit Court is attached which certifies that those pleadings were not a part of the record in this action. A trial judge may not take judicial notice of such records. Kostecos v. Johnson, Fla.1956, 85 So.2d 594; and Novack v. Novack, Fla.App.1967, 196 So.2d 499. The motion to strike is granted. See Kelley v. Kelley, Fla.1954, 75 So.2d 191; and Sheldon v. Tiernan, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 593.

Sherman says his motion to intervene should have been allowed under Wags Transportation System Inc. v. City of Miami Beach, Fla.1956, 88 So.2d 751. Appellee says it was properly denied under the authority of Dickinson v. Segal, Fla.1969, 219 So.2d 435.

A review of the record and the motion for leave to intervene reveals insufficient allegations to bring this motion under the authority of Wags, supra. It is, therefore, controlled by Dickinson, supra, and we hold that the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in denying the motion for leave to intervene. See Wogisch v. Tiger, Fla.App. 1966, 193 So.2d 187.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1858 Considered and Passed Senate (CPS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1858

                To provide for community disaster loans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

              October 7 (legislative day, October 6), 2005

 Mr. Vitter (for himself and Mr. Frist) introduced the following bill; 
   which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                To provide for community disaster loans.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Community Disaster Loan Act of 
2005''.

SEC. 2. DISASTER LOANS.

    (a) Essential Services.--Of the amounts provided in Public Law 109-
62 for ``Disaster Relief'', up to $750,000,000 may be transferred to 
the Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program for the cost of direct 
loans as authorized under section 417 of the Robert T. Stafford 
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5184) to be 
used to assist local governments in providing essential services: 
Provided, That such transfer may be made to subsidize gross obligations 
for the principal amount of direct loans not to exceed $1,000,000,000 
under section 417 of the Stafford Act: Provided further, That 
notwithstanding section 417(b) of the Stafford Act, the amount of any 
such loan issued pursuant to this section may exceed $5,000,000: 
Provided further, That notwithstanding section 417(c)(1) of the 
Stafford Act, such loans may not be canceled: Provided further, That 
the cost of modifying such loans shall be as defined in section 502 of 
the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 (2 U.S.C. 661a).
    (b) Administrative Expenses.--Of the amounts provided in Public Law 
109-62 for ``Disaster Relief'', up to $1,000,000 may be transferred to 
the Disaster Assistance Direct Loan Program for administrative expenses 
to carry out the direct loan program, as authorized by section 417 of 
the Stafford Act.
                                 <all>
```
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1308 

To establish an Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 23, 2005 

Mr. BAUCUS introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To establish an Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance, and 

for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Trade Adjustment As5 sistance for Firms Reorganization Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. OFFICE OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 3 of title II of the Trade 

8 Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 2341 et seq.) is amended by in9 serting after section 255 the following new section: 
2

•S 1308 IS

1 ‘‘SEC. 255A. OFFICE OF TRADE ADJUSTMENT ASSISTANCE. 

2 ‘‘(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Not later than 90 days after 

3 the date of enactment of the Trade Adjustment Assistance 

4 for Firms Reorganization Act, there shall be established 

5 in the International Trade Administration of the Depart6 ment of Commerce an Office of Trade Adjustment Assist7 ance. 

8 ‘‘(b) PERSONNEL.—The Office shall be headed by a 

9 Director, and shall have such staff as may be necessary 

10 to carry out the responsibilities of the Secretary of Com11 merce described in this chapter. 

12 ‘‘(c) FUNCTIONS.—The Office shall assist the Sec13 retary of Commerce in carrying out the Secretary’s re14 sponsibilities under this chapter.’’. 

15 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of con16 tents for the Trade Act of 1974 is amended by inserting 

17 after the item relating to section 255, the following new 

18 item:

‘‘Sec. 255A. Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.’’.

19 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. 

20 Section 256(b) of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 

21 2346(b)) is amended by striking ‘‘2007’’ and inserting 

22 ‘‘2012’’.

Æ
Order entered July 2 2 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 15 - 00339 - CV PONDEROSA PINE ENERGY, LLC, NI XON PEABODY, LLP, AN D SHANNON, GRACEY, RATLIFF & MI LLER, LLP, Appellant s V. ILLINOVA GENERATING COMPANY N/K/A ILL INOVA CORPORATION, Appellee On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10 - 04536 

### O RDER Appellants are represented by Texas counsel , Joseph W. Spence and B. Frank Cain, and out
- of

- state counsel, Frank H. Pen ski, Constance M. Boland, and Abigail T. Reardon. Together, they have filed appellants’ brief on the merits. They have also filed an unopposed motion, pending before us, for extension of time to file reply brief. Our records do not reflect Mr. Penski, M s. Boland, and Ms. Reardon have filed in this appeal a motion for admission pro hac vice in accordance with rule XIX(a) and (c) of the Rules Governing Admission to the Bar of Texas. See T EX . R. G OVERNING B AR A DMISSION XIX(a),(c); see also T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 82.0361(b) (West 2013) (requiring payment of non

- resident attorney fee). Accordingly, they are not allowed to participate in the proceedings in this cause. However, because the brief is signed by Mr. Cain, it is considered duly filed. Further, b ecause the motion is signed by Mr. Spence, weGRANT the motion and ORDER the brief be filed no later than August 4, 2015
. Should out

- of

state counsel wish to participate in this appeal, they shall file the required motion. /s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

TAMMY KITZMILLER, et al. : Case No. 04cv2688

Plaintiffs :

:

v. : Judge Jones

:

DOVER AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT, :

et al. :

Defendants. :

ORDER

August 17, 2005

THE BACKGROUND OF THIS ORDER IS AS FOLLOW:

Pending before the Court is a Motion to Reconsider the Court’s August 2,

2005 Order (doc. 125) filed by non-party subpoenaed witnesses, Joseph

Maldonado and Heidi Bernhard-Bubb, on August 11, 2005. On August 17, 2005

the Court held a telephonic conference with the parties in which the Court ordered

an expedited briefing schedule on the above-referenced Motion. The purpose of

this Order is to reduce said expedited briefing schedule to writing. It was evident to

the Court during the telephonic conference that Defendants desire to respond to the

Motion to Reconsider and while it appears unlikely to the Court that Plaintiffs will

respond, they will be provided with the same right to respond as Defendants

possess.

Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 130 Filed 08/17/05 Page 1 of 2
2

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Defendants shall respond to the Motion to Reconsider the Court’s

August 2, 2005 Order within five (5) days from the date of this Order.

2. The non-party subpoenaed witnesses, Joseph Maldonado and Heidi

Bernhard-Bubb, may file a reply brief within five (5) days from the

date of Defendants’ submission.

3. Plaintiffs, should they desire to respond to the Motion to Reconsider,

shall be governed by the same briefing schedule as set forth herein.

s/ John E. Jones III

John E. Jones III

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02688-JEJ Document 130 Filed 08/17/05 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
report included in the Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-52168, 33-69322, 33-71450,
33-89072, 333-02115, 333-10349, 333-16531, 333-16015, 333-30279, 333-30281,
333-45079, 333-45095, 333-45083, 333-62609, 333-62613, 333-36901, 333-85393,
333-85389 and 333-85919) and Form S-3 (File Nos., 33-77964, 333-10455,
333-10459, 333-20911, 333-45067, 333-45127, 333-60859 and 333-85431).

                                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Jackson, Mississippi
March 29, 2000
#### Louis Cornelius JAMES, Jr. v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 49815.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Aug. 3, 1977.

Morris & Coats, Patricia A. Coats, Cleveland, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Catherine W. Underwood, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bolivar County; J. C. Feduccia, Judge.

Before INZER, P. J., and ROBERTSON and WALKER, JJ.

AFFIRMED.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

DENNIS C. DALEY, : 4:CV-04-2213

Plaintiff : (Judge McClure)

v. :

FIRETREE, LTD., and KENN HALL, :

Defendants :

O R D E R

December 14, 2005

BACKGROUND:

Plaintiff, Dennis C. Daley, initiated this action by filing a complaint on

October 7, 2004 against defendants Firetree, LTD. and Kenn Hall. In his threecount complaint plaintiff alleges copyright infringement under the federal Copyright

Act (Count I), unfair competition under the common law (Count II) and tortuous

interference with advantageous business relations (Count III). Jurisdiction of this

court is based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a) as to Count I, § 1338(b) as to Count II

and § 1367(a) as to Count III. 

Before the court is a motion for partial judgment on the pleadings filed by

defendants on October 25, 2005. A brief in support of the motion was filed the

Case 4:04-cv-02213-JFM Document 29 Filed 12/14/05 Page 1 of 3
2

same day. 

No brief has been filed in opposition to the motion. Under LR 7.6 of the

Local Rules of the United States District Court for the Middle District of

Pennsylvania, any respondent who fails to file a responsive brief in a timely fashion

shall be deemed not to oppose the motion. 

In this instance defendants failed to file a certification as required by LR 7.1

that he or she has sought concurrence in the motion from each party and that it has

been either given or denied. Furthermore, defendants also did not comply with the

provision of LR 7.1 which requires every motion to be accompanied by a form of

order which, if approved by the court, would grant the relief sought in the motion. 

As plaintiff is represented by counsel, the court can only assume that counsel

has not been able to muster arguments against the motion, whether or not he may

have earlier refused to concur in the motion. The court will therefore grant the

motion as unopposed, and without a merits analysis. If for some reason plaintiff

finds this resolution of the motion unacceptable, he will need to file a motion for

reconsideration within ten (10) days. See LR 7.10. 

Case 4:04-cv-02213-JFM Document 29 Filed 12/14/05 Page 2 of 3
3

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:

1. Defendants’ motion for partial judgment on the pleadings (Rec. Doc.

No. 26, filed October 25, 2005) is granted as unopposed. 

2. Counts II and III of plaintiff’s complaint are dismissed with prejudice. 

3. Plaintiff’s claim for statutory damages under the Copyright Act is

limited to a single award for each work proved to have been infringed regardless of

the number of copies of the work made or number of infringements established. 

 s/ James F. McClure, Jr. 

James F. McClure, Jr.

United States District Judge

Case 4:04-cv-02213-JFM Document 29 Filed 12/14/05 Page 3 of 3
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350 (Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Burzynski Research Institute, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSBfor the period ending February 28, 2006, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned herebycertifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-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 resultsof operations of the Company.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to BurzynskiResearch Institute, Inc. and will be retained by Burzynski ResearchInstitute, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission orits staff upon request.

 
| Date:  May 30, 2006 | /s/ Stanislaw R. Burzynski                     |
|-------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
|                          | Stanislaw R. Burzynski,  President, Secretary, |
|                          | Treasurer and Chairman of  the                 |
|                          | Board of Directors                             |
|                          | (Chief Executive Officer  and                  |
|                          | Principal Financial  Officer)                  |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 169 (Tuesday, September 2, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46250]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23152]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-457-000]


Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

August 26, 1997.
    Take notice on August 22, 1997, Northern Natural Gas Company 
(Northern), tendered for filing to become part of Northern's FERC Gas 
Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheet:

Second Revised Sheet No. 299

    Northern states that the instant filing is made in compliance with 
the Commission's Order issued February 27, 1997 in Docket Nos. RM91-11-
006 and RM87-34-072, addressing the right of first refusal maximum 
contract term.
    Northern states that copies of the filing were served upon 
Northern's customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such petitions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. All 
protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken in this proceeding, but will not serve 
to make Protestant a party to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing 
are on file with the Commission and are available for inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23152 Filed 8-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M