alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

, Justices 

# Order

April 15, 2016

153370

- 3 (59)

In re Estate of IRENE GORNEY.

_________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

SC: 153370

v COA: 323090

Huron Probate Court:

ESTATE OF IRENE GORNEY, 13

- 039597

- CZ

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

In re Estate of WILLIAM B. FRENCH.

_________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HU MAN

SERVICES,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

SC: 153371

v COA: 323185

Calhoun Probate Court:

DANIEL GENE FRENCH, Personal 2013

- 000992

- CZ

Representative for the Estate of WILLIAM

B. FRENCH,

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

In re Estate of WILMA KETCHUM.

_________________________________________2

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 15, 2016 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

SC: 153372

v COA: 323304

Clinton Probate Court:

ESTATE OF WILMA KETCHUM 14

- 028416

- CZ

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

In re Estate of OLIVE RASMER.

_________________________________________

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN

SERVICES,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

SC: 153373

v COA: 326642

Bay Probate Court:

RICHARD R ASMER, Personal Re presentative 14

- 049740

- CZ

of the Estate of OLIVE RASMER

Defendant

- Appellee.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendants

- appellees to extend the

time for filing their answer to the application fo r leave to appeal is GRANTED. The

application will be accepted as timely filed if submitted on or before April 28, 2016.

Clerk
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

PATRICK GATHIGI KARANJA,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 09-70564

Agency No. A088-736-495

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 20, 2011** 

Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Patrick Gathigi Karanja, a native and citizen of Kenya, petitions pro se for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). 

FILED

MAY 04 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 09-70564

Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial

evidence the agency’s factual findings, Nagoulko v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1015 (9th

Cir. 2003), and we deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Karanja does not raise any challenge to the BIA’s determination that his

asylum application is time-barred.

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Karanja did not

establish past persecution or a clear probability of future persecution in Kenya

because he failed to demonstrate that a protected ground was at least one central

reason for the death of his father. See Parussimova v. Mukasey, 555 F.3d 734,

740-41 (9th Cir. 2009). Accordingly, Karanja’s withholding of removal claim

fails.

We reject Karanja’s contention that the BIA failed to address his CAT claim

because it expressly found he failed to raise any argument regarding the IJ’s denial

of CAT relief. We lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of Karanja’s CAT claim

because he did not exhaust it before the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d

674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).
3 09-70564

Finally, we lack jurisdiction to review Karanja’s remaining contentions

because they are either unexhausted, see Barron, 358 F.3d at 678, or challenge a

BIA order that is not properly before this court, see 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a)(5) (a

petition for review is the exclusive means of judicial review).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
<TABLE>
                                                                                                   EXHIBIT 12
                     COLUMBUS SOUTHERN POWER COMPANY
     Computation of Consolidated Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                    (in thousands except ratio data)
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                      Twelve
                                                                                                      Months
                                                                  Year Ended December 31,             Ended
                                                    1994       1995       1996      1997       1998   3/31/99 
<S>                                               <C>        <C>        <C>       <C>        <C>      <C>
Fixed Charges:                                                                                      
  Interest on First Mortgage Bonds. . . . . . . . $68,471    $66,811     $59,711    $55,156   $47,323  $45,647
  Interest on Other Long-term Debt. . . . . . . .  10,221      8,829      12,125     15,525    23,594   24,928
  Interest on Short-term Debt . . . . . . . . . .     817      1,328       2,400      5,104     3,493    3,139
  Miscellaneous Interest Charges. . . . . . . . .   4,566      4,657       4,374      4,729     4,459    4,480
  Estimated Interest Element in Lease Rentals . .   3,700      4,100       4,600      4,100     5,300    5,300
       Total Fixed Charges. . . . . . . . . . . . $87,775    $85,725     $83,210    $84,614   $84,169  $83,494
                                                                                                    
Earnings:                                                                                           
  Net Income (Loss) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$109,845   $110,616   $107,108   $119,379   $133,044 $134,817  
  Plus Federal Income Taxes . . . . . . . . . . .  49,838     58,648     60,302     69,760     71,202   73,025  
  Plus State Income Taxes . . . . . . . . . . . .       1          7         11          6          3       16
  Plus Fixed Charges (as above) . . . . . . . . .  87,775     85,725     83,210     84,614     84,169   83,494  
       Total Earnings . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$247,459   $254,996   $250,631   $273,759   $288,418  291,352        
                                                                                                    
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges. . . . . . . .    2.81       2.97       3.01       3.23       3.42     3.48    


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.1


 





AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO WARRANT


 


This
Amendment No. 1 To Warrant (this “Amendment”) is made as of __________, 2018, by Skyline Medical Inc.
(to be renamed Precision Therapeutics Inc. as of February 1, 2018) (the “Company”), in regards to that certain
Common Stock Purchase Warrant to dated November 25, 2016, (the “Warrant”) issued to [Name of Holder] (“Holder”).
Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings given to them in the Warrant.


 


AMENDMENTS


 


		1.	Section 2(b) is hereby amended and restated to read in its entirety as follows:
	 	 	 
	 	 	“b)	Exercise Price. The exercise price per share of the Common Stock under this Warrant shall be $1.00 (the “Exercise
    Price”).”



 


		2.	Except as specifically amended hereby, the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect in accordance
with its terms. For clarification, the Exercise Date was May 25, 2017, and the Termination Date continues to be November 25, 2021.



 


In Witness
Whereof, the Company has executed this Amendment as of the date first written above.


 


 


	 	SKYLINE MEDICAL INC.	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By: 	 	 
	 	Its: 	 	 
	 	 	 






 





 


	 	[NAME OF HOLDER]	 
	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	By: 	 	 
	 	Name:	 	 
	 	Title:
PNM Resources


Alvarado Square


Albuquerque, NM 87158


www.pnmresources.com


EXHIBIT 32.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO § 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011 , for PNM Resources, Inc. (“Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 8, 2011 (“Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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

|    |                                                                                                                                                     
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:August 8, 2011By:/s/ Patricia K. CollawnPatricia K. CollawnPresident and Chief Executive OfficerPNM Resources, Inc.By:/s/ Charles N. EldredCharles N. EldredExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT PETER GONZALEZ, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. J. GARIB AY, C o rre c tiona l Offic e r, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt, And M . A. SM ELOSKI, W arde n; N. GR ANNIS, C hie f Inm at e Appe a ls, De fe nda

nts. No. 12-56610 D.C . No. 3:09-c v-01080-W -M DD M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia Thom a s J. W

he la n, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Ja

nua ry 21, 2014 ** B e fore : C ANB Y, SILVER M AN, a nd PAEZ, C irc uit Judge s. 

# FIL ED JAN 27 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).J. Ga

riba y , a C a lifornia

sta te c orre c tiona l offic e r, a

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s orde r de ny ing him qua lifie d im

m unity in Pe te r Gonz a le z ’ s 42 U.S.C . § 1983 a c tion a lle ging tha t Ga riba y re ta lia te d a ga inst Gonz a le z be c a use Gonz a le z file d a grie va nc e a ga i nst Ga

riba y . W e dism i ss for la c k

of a ppe lla te jurisdic tion. W e la c k jurisdic tion to c onside r this interloc utory a ppe a l be c a

use “ an orde r de ny ing qua lifie d im

m un ity on the ground tha

t a ge nuine issue of m at e ria l fa c t e xists is not a

fina l, im m e diat e ly a ppe a la b l e orde r.” Maropulos v . C ounty of Los Ange le s , 560 F.3d 974, 975 (9th C ir. 2009) (pe r c uriam ), c itingJ ohnson v
. J

one s , 515 U.S. 304, 313-20 (1995). The distric t c ourt de nie d qua lifie d im m unity to Gariba y a fte r de t e rm ining tha

t the re we re ge n

uine dispute s of m ate ria l fa c t a s to whe the r Gariba

y ’ s ne gative work e va luation a nd tra n sfe r re c o m

m e n dation we re re ta lia tory , a nd tha t thosefa c t s, if prove n , would e sta blish a viola tion of Gonz a le z ’ s c le arly

e sta blishe d First Am e ndm e nt rights. Ac c ordingly , we dism iss this a ppe a l for la c k of jurisdic tion. DISM I SSE D.

1 2 - 5 6 6 1 0 2
Exhibit 32.1 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



EXHIBIT 32.1

Section 1350 Certifications



I am the Principal  Executive Officer of EnzymeBioSystems, a
Nevada corporation (the “Company”). I am delivering this certificate in connection with the Form 10-K of the
Company for the fiscal period ended June 30, 2012 and filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“Form
10-K”).



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of EnzymeBioSystems (the “Company”) certifies to his
knowledge that:

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                            
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended June 30, 2012 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 that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.                                  





|                           |                             
|-------------------------- | ----------------------------
|/s/   Anushavan Yeranosyan |                             
|Anushavan Yeranosyan       |                             
|                           | Principal  Executive Officer
|                           |                             
|Date:  October 11, 2012    |                             
|                           |                             
|                           |
**EXHIBIT 10.5**

** FOURTH SUPPLEMENTTOUNIT PURCHASEAGREEMENTDated August 13,2004, as heretofore amended, withCASCADEINVESTMENT, L.L.C.**

** **September 30, 2005

            Referenceis made to the above-captioned agreement (the "UPA"). Capitalized terms used herein without definition have the respective meaningsspecified in the UPA.

            1.         Section3 of the UPA, as heretofore amended, makes provision with respect to theClosing occurring on or before September 30, 2005.  The parties have agreedthat the Closing may occur on any Business Day through and including October 31,2005.

            2.         Thisinstrument shall take effect as an amendment to the UPA pursuant to Section 13thereof.

[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank;Signature Page Follows]

----

[Signature Page To FOURTH Supplement]

            IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theparties have executed and delivered this Fourth Supplement to Unit PurchaseAgreement as of the date set forth above.

**PNM RESOURCES, INC.**

** **

By: s/ Terry R.Horn       Terry R. Horn       Vice President, CorporateSecretary       and Chief Financial Officer

 

**CASCADE INVESTMENT, L.L.C.**

**  **

By: /s/ MichaelLarson       Michael Larson       Business Manager

** **

-2-
EX-10.28





 Exhibit 10.28 

POWER OF ATTORNEY 
 PT Ekanusa
Yudhakarya Indah, a limited liability company duly organized and existing under the laws of Indonesia, domiciled and having its principal office at Gedung Bursa Efek Indonesia Tower 1, Lt. 27, Suite 2703, Jl. Jend. Sudirman Kav. 52-53, Kel. Senayan, Kec. Kebayoran Baru, Kota Administrasi Jakarta, Selatan, in this matter represented by Leonard Mamahit, acting in his capacity as Director of PT Ekanusa Yudhakarya Indah, (hereinafter
referred to as the “AUTHORIZER”); 
 The AUTHORIZER, in its position as heretofore described by these presents, fully authorizes and
grants, to the extent permitted by law, a Power of Attorney, with right of substitution, to Grab Inc., a company duly organized and existing under the laws of Cayman Island, domiciled and having its principal office International Corporation
Services Ltd., PO Box 472, 2nd Floor, harbor Place, 103 South Church Street, George Town, Grand Cayman KY1-1106, Cayman Islands, in this matter represented by Anthony Tan, acting in his capacity as Director of
Grab Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the “AUTHORIZED”); 
 ESPECIALLY 

To act for and on behalf of the AUTHORIZER, to take all necessary actions (including, without limitation, to represent the AUTHORIZER at General Meetings Of
Shareholders of PT Solusi Pengiriman Indonesia (hereinafter referred to as the “Meetings”) and to vote its shares at such Meetings and to sign all necessary documents, contracts, agreements, paper writings and/or applications of all
such actions) to effect the sale and transfer of the AUTHORIZER’s shares and/or share subscriptions and/or assignment of dividend of the AUTHORIZER in PT Solusi Pengiriman Indonesia to any transferee whatsoever on such terms and
conditions as the AUTHORIZED shall in its absolute discretion determine. 












 The AUTHORIZER hereby ratifies any and all acts carried out by the AUTHORIZED or its substitute under or
pursuant to this Power of Attorney within the limits of such Power of Attorney, including the legal consequences arising therefrom, on the understanding that in carrying out such acts, the AUTHORIZED or its substitute shall adhere to all rules and
regulations stipulated in the Articles of Association of PT Solusi Pengiriman Indonesia and those issued by government authorities or legislative bodies. 

This Power of Attorney is irrevocable and shall not terminate for any reason whatsoever wherefore the AUTHORIZER hereby waives any and all Indonesian
legislation which may be in conflict herewith including but not limited to Article 1813, 1814 and 1816 of the Indonesian Civil Code. 
 This Power of
Attorney is executed on 22 June 2018 and shall be effective immediately. 
  

	
	 The AUTHORIZER
 PT Ekanusa
Yudhakarya Indah
  
 Stamp Duty

Rp.6000
  

By: /s/ Leonard
Mamahit                                        
 
 Name: Leonard Mamahit
 Title:
Director


 The AUTHORIZED 
 Grab
Inc. 

			
	
	By: /s/ Anthony
Tan                                         
        
	Name: Anthony Tan
	Title: Director


  
 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                          23,215
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   71,326
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,953
<INVENTORY>                                     60,125
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               182,204
<PP&E>                                         211,880
<DEPRECIATION>                                 106,364
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 369,646
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          104,837
<BONDS>                                        136,619
<COMMON>                                        13,810
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     24,172
<OTHER-SE>                                      49,578
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   369,646
<SALES>                                        116,716
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,716
<CGS>                                           88,403
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   88,403
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   224
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,635
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,163
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,211
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,952
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,952
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Audience Productions, Inc. a Washington corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Jay Schwartz, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies to the best of his knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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.
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Audience Productions, Inc., and will be retained by Audience Productions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|       |  |                         |  |  |  |  |  | 
|------ |  | ----------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | 
|       |  |                         |  | 
|By:    |  | /s/ JAY T. SCHWARTZ    
|Name:  |  | Jay T. Schwartz        
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:  |  | December 28, 2010
June 12, 2012

Mr. Gerald P. Snook Cessna Aircraft Company

One Citation Lane Wichita, KS 67209

Dear Mr. Snook:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from §§ 91.409(a) and (b) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your May 30, 2012, exemption request on behalf of Cessna Aircraft Company into the public docket (No. FAA-2012-0604), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you m ust send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. We will consider the docket on your request open during this period. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-4059.

Sincerely,

/s/ Brenda D. Courtney Manager, Aircraft and Airport Rules Division

Enclosure