alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION

     Pursuant to the provisions of the Georgia Business Corporation Code,
Section 14-2-1002(9), the undersigned corporation hereby amends its Restated
Articles of Incorporation dated December 16, 1997, and for that purpose, submits
the following statement:

1.   The name of the Corporation is Georgia-Pacific Corporation (the
"Corporation").

2.   The Restated Articles of Incorporation are amended by adding Section H to
     Article V thereof to read as follows:

          H.  Reacquired Shares.  Any shares of Common Stock purchased or
          otherwise acquired by the Corporation in any manner whatsoever
          shall constitute treasury shares.

3.   The foregoing amendment was adopted by the Corporation's Board of Directors
     on March 26, 1998.

4.   Pursuant to the Georgia Business Corporation Code Section 14-2-631(d),
     Shareholder approval is not required for this amendment.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused these Articles of Amendment
to be executed and its corporate seal to be affixed and has caused its seal and
the execution hereof to be attested, all by its duly authorized officers, this
31st day of March, 1998.

                              GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORPORATION
                              By:/s/ James F. Kelley
                                     James F. Kelley
                                     Senior Vice President- Law
                                       and General Counsel
[CORPORATE SEAL]

Attest:

/s/ Kenneth F. Khoury
Kenneth F. Khoury
Vice President, Deputy General
  Counsel and Secretary
EX-10.3(c)






 Exhibit 10.3(c) 

SANA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC. 

2018 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN 

AMENDMENT 
 Pursuant to
the authority reserved to the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Sana Biotechnologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), under Section 10.4 of the Company’s 2018 Equity Incentive
Plan (the “Plan”), the Board hereby amends the Plan as follows. 
 1. The first sentence of Section 4.1 of the
Plan is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 
 “Subject to adjustment under Section 8 hereof, Awards
may be made under the Plan covering up to 64,599,641 shares of Common Stock.” 
 2. Except as set forth herein, the Plan shall remain in
full force and effect in accordance with its terms. 
 * * * * * * * * * * 













 I hereby certify that the foregoing Amendment to the Plan was duly adopted by the Board
effective as of November 30, 2020. 
 I hereby further certify that the foregoing Amendment to the Plan was duly adopted by the
Company’s stockholders effective as of December 4, 2020. 
 Executed on this 4th day of December, 2020. 

 

	
	 /s/ James J. MacDonald

	James J. MacDonald, Secretary
# C_2020240EN.01003001.xml

| 20.7.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 240/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.7.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 240/30

---

Action brought on 27 May 2020 — EnergieVerbund Dresden v Commission

(Case T-317/20)

(2020/C 240/38)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: EnergieVerbund Dresden GmbH (Dresden, Germany) (represented by: I. Zenke and T. Heymann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the defendant of 26 February 2019 declaring the concentration ‘RWE/E.ON Assets’ compatible with the internal market (Case M.8871) (OJ 2020 C 111, p. 1); |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the defendant of 26 February 2019 declaring the concentration ‘RWE/E.ON Assets’ compatible with the internal market (Case M.8871) (OJ 2020 C 111, p. 1);

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

The action is based on three pleas in law, which are essentially identical or similar to those put forward in Case T-312/20, EVH v Commission.

---
# C_2021182EN.01005001.xml

| 10.5.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.5.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/50

---

Order of the President of the Court of Justice of 5 February 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Köln — Germany) — Germanwings GmbH v KV

(Case C-8/21) (1)

(2021/C 182/67)

Language of the case: German

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 88, 15.3.2021.

---
#### BAER *v.*HESPEL.

Fraudulent Conveyances — Bill in Aid op Execution — Consideration.

In suit by judgment creditor against husband and wife to set aside conveyance of real estate to wife’s sister, as in fraud of plaintiff, finding of trial court that there was sufficient consideration for transfer, *held,*justified by preponderance of evidence, although there was conflict.

*428Appeal from Allegan; Miles (Fred T.), J.

Submitted April 5, 1932.

(Docket No. 17, Calendar No. 36,229.)

Decided June 6, 1932.

Bill in aid of execution by Isaac Baer against Joseph A. Hespel, Mary E. Hespel, and Azelma Claeys. Bill dismissed. Plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

*Harry Pell,*for defendants.

Clark, C. J.

Plaintiff filed bill in aid of execution against his judgment debtors, defendants Joseph A. Hespel and Mary E. Hespel, and joined as a defendant Azelma Claeys, to whom Mrs. Hespel, a sister, had conveyed certain real estate, the conveyances being challenged as in fraud of plaintiff. The trial court found a consideration for the transfers fully equal to the value of the property, and decree dismissing the bill followed. Plaintiff has appealed.

The issue is of fact. There is conflict, but the preponderance of evidence establishes that Mrs. Hespel borrowed sums of money from her sister, giving notes therefor, and that the sister was a creditor to an amount equal to the value of the property conveyed, and that the conveyances were to meet such demands. We are not moved to disturb the finding of the trial court.

Affirmed, with costs to appellees.

McDonald, Potter, Sharpe, North, Fead, Wiest, and Butzel, JJ., concurred.
SERVED: August 19, 2013 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MA TIER OF 

SKYWEST AIRLINES, INC. 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-2013-0619 

ERRATA-CORRECTION OF CASE NUMBER 

Notice of Assignment of Proceeding Order served August 13--correct case number is 

2012NM060014 

Richard C. Goodwin 

U.S. Administrative Law Judge 

Attachment - Service List 

20 !~ ') "} i" ..J:.J 
SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-· Suite 2W10001 

Robert Spitzer, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of the Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, W A 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FPLX: 425-227-1007 

ONE COPY 

Michael L. Dworkin, Respondent's Counsel 

Michael L. Dworkin and Associates 

465 California Street, Suite 210 

San Francisco, CA 94104-1808 

TEL: 415-421-2500 

FPLX: 415-421-2560 

Todd C. Emerson, Esq. 

Director - Government and Legal Affairs · 

SkyWest Airlines, Respondent 

444 South River Road 

St. George, UT 84 790 

TEL: 435-634-3530 

FPLX: 435-634-3505 

FDMS Nos. FAA-2013-0619 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue; S.W.,Wiibur Wright Building-Suite 2WIOOO, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

-3-
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-6609

LARRY EDWARD HENDRICKS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus BARRY GALLOWAY; LEROY CARTLEDGE; CURRY; BUSH; CATHERINE KENDALL; JAMES PARKER; COLIE RUSHTON; MARY D. ANDERSON; SQUIRES; BARTON VINCENT; GARY D. MAYNARD; JOHN DOE 1; JOHN DOE 2; JOHN DOE 3; JOHN DOE 4, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. David C. Norton, District Judge. (CA-03-740-18BC) Submitted: July 14, 2004 Decided: August 3, 2004 Before WIDENER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Larry Edward Hendricks, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Michael Pruitt, MCDONALD, PATRICK, TINSLEY, BAGGETT & POSTON, Greenwood, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Larry Edward Hendricks appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Hendricks v. Galloway , No. CA-03-740-18BC (D.S.C. Mar. 1, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### James CARPENTER, Petitioner, v. DADE COUNTY, etc., et al., Respondents.

No. 43284.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 13, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 269 So.2d 775.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN and McCAIN, JJ., concur.

DEKLE, J., dissents.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Robert M. HALLAL v. SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA.

No. 62640.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: Robert M. Hallal, applying for remedial writ. Parish of Orleans.

Writ denied.
#### M. L. HANDLEY, Appellant, v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH COMPANY, a New York corporation, Appellee.

No. 71-573.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 22, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Hollis D. TALKINGTON, Petitioner, v. Hon. James CALHOUN, as Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court, Hillsborough County, Tampa, Florida, Respondent.

No. 72-32.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 21, 1972.

Habeas corpus denied.
**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 Apollo Gold Corporation (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned hereby
      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 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.







/s/ *R.
      David Russell*


R.
      David
      Russell


President
      and Chief Executive Officer


March
      24,
      2008





/s/ *Melvyn
      Williams*


Melvyn
      Williams


Chief
      Financial Officer and Senior Vice


President-Finance
      and Corporate Development


March
      24,
      2008





A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
      and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 123 (Tuesday, June 26, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29824-29825]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13673]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--R Consortium, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on June 8, 2018, pursuant to Section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), R Consortium, Inc. (``R 
Consortium'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Ketchum Trading LLC, Chicago, IL, has withdrawn as a 
party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and R Consortium intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On September 15, 2015, R Consortium filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section

[[Page 29825]]

6(b) of the Act on October 2, 2015 (80 FR 59815).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on December 21, 
2016. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
Section 6(b) of the Act on January 31, 2017 (82 FR 8845).

Suzanne Morris,
Chief, Premerger and Division Statistics Unit, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2018-13673 Filed 6-25-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 285 Engrossed in House (EH)]

H. Res. 285

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    October 26, 1993.  
Whereas Polly Klaas was abducted at knifepoint by a stranger who entered her 
        home in Petaluma, California, late at night on October 1, 1993, while 
        her mother was sleeping in the adjacent room;
Whereas hundreds of generous volunteers have donated their time, energy, and 
        funds to the search for Polly by establishing the Polly Klaas Search 
        Center, which has distributed over 7,000,000 flyers with pictures of 
        Polly and her suspected abductor nationwide;
Whereas the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Petaluma Police Department 
        have also dedicated substantial resources and worked tirelessly on the 
        search for Polly;
Whereas despite the continuing work of the community and law enforcement 
        agencies, efforts to locate Polly have not yet succeeded;
Whereas abducted children are often recovered as a direct result of photographs 
        that are distributed nationwide;
Whereas the United States Postal Service is not permitted to offer free postage 
        for mailings concerning kidnapped children; and
Whereas the Polly Klaas Search Center is currently facing severe financial 
        difficulties due to the high cost of postage: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that 
the Attorney General and the Director of the Federal Bureau of 
Investigation should cooperate with the United States Postal Service 
and the Polly Klaas Search Center to use nationwide mailings to 
disseminate as quickly as possible information concerning the 
kidnapping of Polly Klaas.
    Sec. 2. The community of Petaluma, California, the Petaluma Police 
Department, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation are commended for 
their hard work on the Polly Klaas kidnapping case.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
#### Earl FAULKNER, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, Respondent.

No. 71-810.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 5, 1971.

Habeas corpus denied.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential. 

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit

__________________________ 

ERIC MARTIN MATTHEWS, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES, 

Defendant-Appellee.

__________________________ 

2013-5109

__________________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in No. 10-CV-0648, Judge Victor J. Wolski. 

__________________________ 

ON MOTION

__________________________ 

O R D E R

Eric Martin Matthews moves for a 14-day extension of 

time to file his reply brief.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

The motion is granted. The reply brief is due on or before October 21, 2013. 

Case: 13-5109 Document: 18 Page: 1 Filed: 10/22/2013
MATTHEWS V. US 2

FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole

Daniel E. O’Toole

 Clerk

s27 

Case: 13-5109 Document: 18 Page: 2 Filed: 10/22/2013
<PAGE>
                                                                  Page 18 of 18



                              GENESEE CORPORATION
                                AND SUBSIDIARIES


                                                                      EXHIBIT 99

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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Genesee Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 25, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, Steven M. Morse,
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (as Principal Financial Officer) of
the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

        (ii) The information contained in the Report presents, in all material
             respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
             Company.


                                     /s/ Steven M. Morse
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Steven M. Morse
                                     Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
                                     March 7, 2003





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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Genesee Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 25, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange commission on the date hereof (the "Report") I, Stephen B. Ashley,
President of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

        (ii) The information contained in the Report presents, in all material
             respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
             Company.


                                     /s/ Stephen B. Ashley
                                     -----------------------------------
                                     Stephen B. Ashley
                                     President
                                     March 7, 2003
#### Bernice LOSEY, Appellant, v. Dean LOSEY, Ruth Bowers, Howard Losey, Jr., and Howard Losey, Appellees.

No. 67-267.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

May 20, 1969.

Carey, Dwyer, Austin, Cole & Selwood and Edward A. Perse, Miami, for appellant.

Starr W. Horton, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on February 20, 1968 (207 So.2d 283) affirming the final decree of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed April 9, 1969 (221 So.2d 477) and mandate issued May 2, 1969 now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s decision and remanded the cause with directions for disposition in accordance with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;

NOW, THEREFORE, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court heretofore issued in this cause on March 11, 1968 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed February 20, 1968 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the final decree of the circuit court appealed from is reversed with directions to proceed in accordance with the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).