alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(y)

                              MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT

     This Management Agreement ("Agreement") is made this 31st day of May, 2002,
by and between Prospector Gaming Enterprises, Inc., a Nevada corporation (PGE)
and Last Chance, Inc., a Nevada corporation ("Last Chance").

RECITALS:

     A. Capitalized terms used in this Lease and not otherwise defined shall
have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Asset Purchase Agreement
executed by the parties on December 27, 2001.

     B. Pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, PGE has made application to
Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) to transfer the ARCO Petroleum Agreements to
Last Chance but has been advised that ARCO will not be able to process the
application prior to the Closing.

     C. The parties have elected to proceed to Closing on all other terms of the
Integrated Agreements and to await action by ARCO on the transfer of the ARCO
Petroleum Agreements under the terms of this Agreement.

     NOW WHEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals, the mutual
considerations, covenants and agreements provided below, and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby
acknowledged, the PGE and Last Chance agree as follows:

     1. Management. PGE hereby hires Last Chance to manage, operate and maintain
its business of marketing ARCO brand motor fuels at the Gold Ranch Casino and RV
Resort under and pursuant to the Contract Dealer Gasoline Agreement of January
12, 1998, as amended, between PGE and ARCO (Dealer Agreement).

     2. Compensation and Expenses. Last Chance shall perform its obligations
hereunder at its sole cost and expense and shall be entitled to retain the
proceeds of all sales and all other revenue generated under the Dealer
Agreement.

     3. Term. This Agreement shall terminate upon the earlier to occur of the
following events: (i) the approval by ARCO of the transfer by PGE of the ARCO
Petroleum Agreements to Last Chance; or (ii) the refusal by ARCO to approve such
transfer. In the event that ARCO fails to approve the transfer, PGE shall, at
its sole cost and expense, (i) use its best efforts to defend any claim for
acceleration of the promissory note given by PGE to ARCO under and pursuant to
the Loan Agreement between PGE and ARCO (ARCO Loan) and any default under the
Dealer Agreement, and (ii) indemnify, protect and defend Last Chance from and
against any liability therefor. In the event that PGE is ultimately held liable
on the note and pays that obligation, Last Chance shall reimburse PGE for such
payment to the extent that Last Chance receives the improvements and equipment
purchased by PGE with the proceeds of the ARCO Loan. In the event that Last
Chance receives less than all of such improvements and equipment, its obligation
to reimburse PGE hereunder shall be pro rated accordingly.

       Last Chance, Inc.                  Prospector Gaming Enterprises, Inc.


       /s/  Ferenc B. Szony               /s/ Peter Stremmel

       Ferenc B. Szony, President         Peter Stremmel, President
259 La. 878

#### TEXAS GAS TRANSMISSION CORPORATION v. Grady J. SOILEAU et al.

No. 51728.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 18, 1971.

In re: Texas Gas Transmission Corporation applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Acadia. 251 So.2d 104.

Application not considered. The record reveals that applicant’s application for rehearing was not timely filed in the Court of Appeal; hence that court’s judgment became final and the Court, under Act 2167 C.C.P. was without authority to consider relator’s application for a rehearing.
#### JOHN DUNCAN *vs.*THOMAS S. NEWLIN, surviving partner of NEWLIN & WOLLASTON.

A paroi promise revives a debt due by promissory note for *six years.*

Assumpsit. Pleas, non assumpsit and act of limitations. Issues.

This was an action on a promissory note drawn by Newlin & *110Woollaston in favor of Duncan, and dated 13th October 1823, for $404.

On the books ofNewlin & Woollaston were the following credits; July 3, 1826, credit by $100 or account of this note; 7th May 1827 interest up to date, and 31st December 1827, interest to date.

*Bayard*for defts.

raised this question: whether if a promise, or what is equivalent to a promise, be proved and relied on to take a promissory note out of the act of limitations, that promise must not be within *three*years of the bringing suit. And he argued that the promise being by paroi could have no greater effect in reviving another cause of action than if itself had been the cause of action. A paroi acknowledgment, therefore, of a debt due by note would sustain that note no longer than for three years.

*Hamilton*for plff. *J. %H. Bayard*for deft.

But the *court*decided that such an acknowledgment revived the debt in its original efficacy. The admission of a debt existing in the shape of a promissory note, therefore, revives the debt for the whole period applicable to such a form of security. The effect of the admission depends not upon its character whether by paroi or in writing, but upon the nature of the original cause of action. The argument however would fail in this case if it were otherwise. The proof is that the credit of July 3, 1826 of $100 is in the handwriting of Woolaston, one of the partners. This was within six years of the bringing this suit and being an acknowledgment under the hand of the party of a subsisting demand, the limitation applicable to it would be six years even if this were the ground of action. The acknowledgment is in the books of the partnership and therefore stronger than if written in a letter or other form.

A verdict was taken for plff. for $388 80, and the court being reqested reserved this question for the court in bank. *Vide post page*
Exhibit 32 - Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
             Act of 2002

In connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Year
Ended December 31, 2005, (the "Report") by Interchange Financial Services
Corporation ("Registrant"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:


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


     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of  Registrant  as of the dates  and for the  periods  covered  by the
          Report.


                                    /s/ Anthony S. Abbate
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Anthony S. Abbate
                                    President and Chief Executive Officer

                                    /s/ Charles T. Field
                                    -------------------------------------------
                                    Charles T. Field
                                    Senior Vice President and CFO

Date: March 16, 2006
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Solelyin connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report of RetractableTechnologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30,2007, as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned Thomas J. Shaw, Chief ExecutiveOfficer, and Douglas W. Cowan, Chief Financial Officer, do hereby certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

(2)           The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the issuer.

Date:  August 14, 2007
|        | /s/ Thomas J.  Shaw                        |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | THOMAS J. SHAW                             |
|   | PRESIDENT, CHAIRMAN, AND                   |
|   | CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER                    |
|   |                                       |
|   |                                       |
|   | /s/ Douglas W.  Cowan                      |   |
|   | DOUGLAS W. COWAN                           |
|   | VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER |

 

----
# C_2022064EN.01001801.xml

| 7.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 18 November 2021 — Cafpi SA, Aviva assurances SA v Enedis SA

(Case C-691/21)

(2022/C 64/28)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Cafpi SA, Aviva assurances SA

Respondent: Enedis SA

Question referred

Are Articles 2 and 3(1) of Council Directive 85/374/EEC of 25 July 1985 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products (1) to be interpreted as meaning that an electricity distribution system operator may be regarded as a ‘producer’ if it alters the voltage of the electricity from the supplier so that it may be distributed to the final consumer?

---

(1)  OJ 1985 L 210, p. 29.

---
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

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 Ambassadors International, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, Timothy Fogarty, Chief Financial Officer of the Company 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 13a-14(b)
or 15d-14(b) 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/ Timothy T. Fogarty

Timothy T. Fogarty
Chief Financial Officer
November 6, 2003

22
# C_2022318EN.01001201.xml

| 22.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 30 June 2022 — Fakro sp. z o.o. v European Commission, Republic of Poland

(Case C-149/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Competition - Rejection of a complaint by the European Commission - Lack of Union interest)

(2022/C 318/15)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Appellant: Fakro sp. z o.o. (represented by: Z. Kiedacz and A. Radkowiak-Macuda, radcowie prawni)

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: M. Farley, I.V. Rogalski and J. Szczodrowski, acting as Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Fakro sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fakro sp. z o.o. to bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Republic of Poland to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 182, 10.5.2021.

---
# C_2023329EN.01001702.xml

| 18.9.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/17

---

Order of the President of the Court of 5 July 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht München I — Germany) — RSD Reise Service Deutschland GmbH v QL

(Case C-690/21, (1) RSD Reise Service Deutschland)

(2023/C 329/22)

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  
  OJ C 51, 31.1.2022.

---
Exhibit 32 - Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

In  connection  with the filing of the  Annual  Report on Form 10-K for the Year
Ended  December  31, 2004,  (the  "Report") by  Interchange  Financial  Services
Corporation ("Registrant"), each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:

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

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

                                           /s/ Anthony S. Abbate
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Anthony S. Abbate
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer

                                           /s/ Charles T. Field
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Charles T. Field
                                           Senior Vice President and CFO

Date: March 16, 2005
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 31739]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14627]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XG330


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) 
Ecosystem Committee will meet in Anchorage, AK, in July.

DATES: The meeting will be held on Tuesday July 24, 2018, from 9 a.m. 
to 5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Hilton Hotel in the Chart 
Room, 500 W 3rd Ave., Anchorage, AK 99501.
    Council address: North Pacific Fishery Management Council, 605 W 
4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-2252; telephone: (907) 271-
2809.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve MacLean, Council staff; 
telephone: (907) 271-2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Agenda

Tuesday, July 24, 2018

    The meeting agenda includes: Review of the Draft Bering Sea Fishery 
Ecosystem Plan.
    The Agenda is subject to change, and the latest version will be 
posted at: https://www.npfmc.org/committees/ecosystem-committee.

Public Comment

    Public comment letters will be accepted and should be submitted 
either electronically to Steve MacLean, Council staff: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#186b6c7d6e7d3675797b747d79765876777979367f776e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="394a4d5c4f5c1754585a555c58577957565858175e564f">[email protected]</span></a> or through the mail: North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council, 605 W 4th Ave., Suite 306, Anchorage, AK 99501-
2252. In-person oral public testimony will be accepted at the 
discretion of the co-chairmen.

Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids 
should be directed to Shannon Gleason at (907) 271-2809 at least 7 
working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: July 3, 2018.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2018-14627 Filed 7-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Attachment DICR for Tier 2 Data Collection for Certain Chemicals Under the EDSP (EPA ICR #2249.01; OMB # 2070-new [TBD])Test2011 TestCost ($)a2014 AdjustedTest Cost ($)bPaperworkCost ($)cManagementCost ($)dTechnicalCost ($)eClericalCost ($)fManagement(Hours)gTechnical(Hours)hClerical(Hours)iTotal (Hours)jJapanese Quail Two-Generation Toxicity Test336,200355,500124,42524,88580,876 18,664201 1,160 4781,839Larval Amphibian Growth and Development Test258,920273,78495,82419,16562,286 14,374154 893 3681,415Reproduction and Fertility Effects378,479400,206140,07228,01491,047 21,011226 1,305 5382,069Medaka Extended One-Generation Reproduction Test 319,320337,651118,17823,63676,816 17,727190 1,101 4541,745Total 1,292,919$1,367,141$478,499$95,700$ 311,025$71,776$771 4,459 1,838 7,068105.91761%35%20%65%15%124.11$69.75$39.06$jTotal burden hours is used in Table 6 of this ICR for estimating the burden & costs related to data generation paperwork activities.Note: Except for the labor rates, numbers have been rounded to the nearest whole digit.As of October 23, 2014Page 1 of 1Calculations for Paperwork Burden and Costs for Data GenerationActivitiesiBased on total estimated clerical costs (f) divided by the loaded labor rate for clerical staff.hBased on total estimated technical costs (e) divided by the loaded labor rate for technical staff.gBased on total estimated managerial costs (d) divided by the loaded labor rate for managers.fCalculated as 15% of (c), which is 35% of the total estimated test costs.eCalculated as 65% of (c), which is 35% of the total estimated test costs.dCalculated as 20% of (c), which is 35% of the total estimated test costs.cBased on 35% of the total estimated test costs.Estimated Costs in Dollars Estimated Burden HoursaEstimated costs are based on average costs provided by OPP and OPPT.bThe estimated costs for these assays were adjusted using an inflation factor to convert 2011$ to 2014$ (approximately 5.74067% increase). Specifically, the estimated cost in (a) wasentered into the online inflation calculator provided by US Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor and Statistics at: http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 24




Independent Auditors' Consent
-----------------------------


The Board of Directors
Barrister Information Systems Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
33-8749 and 33-23309) on Form S-8 and (No. 333-3701) on Form S-3 of Barrister
Information Systems Corporation of our reports dated June 20, 1997 relating to
the balance sheets of Barrister Information Systems Corporation as of March 31,
1997 and 1996, and the related statements of operations, shareholders' equity
and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended March 31,
1997, and the related schedule which reports appear in or are incorporated by
reference in the March 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of Barrister
Information Systems Corporation.

                              KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Buffalo, New York
June 24, 1997

                                    Page -23-
IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 73 

Congratulating Emporia State University for 150 years of outstanding service 

to the State of Kansas, the United States, and the world. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2013 

Mr. HUELSKAMP submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

RESOLUTION 

Congratulating Emporia State University for 150 years of 

outstanding service to the State of Kansas, the United 

States, and the world. 

Whereas Kansas State Normal School was founded by the 

Kansas Legislature in 1863 for ‘‘the instruction of persons, both male and female, in the art of teaching, and 

in all the various branches that pertain to good common 

school education, and in the mechanic arts, and in the 

arts of husbandry and agricultural chemistry, and in the 

fundamental laws of the United States of America, and 

in what regards the rights and duties of citizens’’; 

Whereas Emporia State University has played a significant 

role in providing higher education to the citizens of Kansas since its founding and throughout its history; 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 73 IH 

Whereas Kansas State Normal School became Kansas State 

Teachers College in 1923, Emporia Kansas State College 

in 1974, and Emporia State University in 1977; 

Whereas over 75,000 alumni have served in the arts, banking, business, education, engineering, finance, government, health care, information management, library 

science, military affairs, science and technology, and 

other occupations; 

Whereas Emporia State University empowers and engages excellent intellectual opportunities for the people of Kansas, 

the United States, and the world through its nationally 

recognized programs; 

Whereas Emporia State University brings State, regional, national, and international prominence to the State of Kansas through its outstanding academic, cultural, and athletic events; 

Whereas Emporia State University will celebrate its sesquicentennial throughout 2013 under the theme, ‘‘Changing 

Lives Since 1863’’; and 

Whereas Emporia State University will commence to celebrate its 150th anniversary on Founders Day, February 

15, 2013: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives con2 gratulates Emporia State University for 150 years of out3 standing service to the State of Kansas, the United States, 

4 and the world. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH 

					NO. 2-05-117-CV

FRED GILANI AND CELINA AREFKIA	APPELLANTS

	V.

YE OLDE LAND CO., LTD.	APPELLEE

	----------

	FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF DENTON COUNTY

	----------

		MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

	On April 1, 2005 and April 19, 2005, we notified appellants, in accordance with rule of appellate procedure 42.3(c), that we would dismiss this appeal unless the $125 filing fee was paid. Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c).  Appellants have not paid the $125 filing fee.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5, 12.1(b).

	Because appellants have failed to comply with a requirement of the rules of appellate procedure and the Texas Supreme Court's order of July 21, 1998,2 we dismiss the appeal.  See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(c), 43.2(f).

	Appellants shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.  See Tex. R. App. P. 5.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL D: LIVINGSTON, DAUPHINOT, and HOLMAN, JJ.	

DELIVERED: May 12, 2005