alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                               Crown Vantage Inc.                  Exhibit 3.1
                    Amendment to the Bylaws of Crown Vantage



Following is the amended Bylaw approved by the Board of Directors on 
March 16, 1998.

ARTICLE II - Section 2.2

     Number and Term.  The number of directors of the Corporation shall be
seven.  This number may be changed from time to time by amendment to these
Bylaws to increase or decrease by 30 percent or less the number of directors
last elected by the stockholders, but only the stockholders may increase or
decrease the number by more than 30 percent.  No decrease in number shall have
the effect of shortening the term of any incumbent director.  Each director
shall hold office until his death, resignation or removal or until his successor
is elected.
Exhibit 32.2
Section  1350 Certifications

STATEMENT
FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION  906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned
is the Chief Financial  Officer of Newsearch,  Inc. This  Certification is made pursuant
to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002.  This  Certification  accompanies
the  Annual  Report  on Form  10-KSB of  Newsearch, Inc. for the year ended December 31,
2006.

The
undersigned certifies that such 10-KSB Report fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that the information contained in such 10-KSB Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
Newsearch, Inc. as of December 31, 2006.

This
Certification is executed as of May 3, 2007.

| | /s/  Kenneth S. Adessky Kenneth S. Adessky Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer)
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to us and will be retained by Newsearch, Inc. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### Jack Swan AKINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-102.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 16, 1971.

ORDER

It appearing that this appeal is from an order of the Circuit Court in and for Hendry County, Florida, affirming the order of the County Judge’s Court on Petition for Hearing Pursuant to F.S. § 322.-261(1) (d) F.S.A., in which the County Judge found that the Department of Motor Vehicles was within the scope of its statutory authority to suspend Appellant’s priv*779ilege to operate a motor vehicle for a period of six months; and

It further appearing that F.S. § 322.31 F.S.A. provides the method of review of an order or ruling of the Department of Motor Vehicles suspending a driver’s license to be “only by a writ of certiorari issued by the Circuit Court in the county wherein such person shall reside, in the manner prescribed by the Florida Appellate Rules”; it is, upon consideration

Ordered that the appeal in this cause be, and the same is hereby dismissed ex mero motu for want of jurisdiction.
#### CHRYSLER LEASING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. Selma Berkhouse LAMB et al., Appellees.

No. 71-1426.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 3, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. John Norman KENT.

No. 62093.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 3, 1978.

In re: John Norman Kent, applying for writs of review, prohibition and/or mandamus. Parish of East Baton Rouge.

Writ granted. The ruling on the motion to suppress is reversed. The case is remanded for further proceedings in the light of *In re Dino,*La., 359 So.2d 586.

SANDERS, C. J., and SUMMERS and MARCUS, JJ., dissent.
Exhibit 31.2 CERTIFICATIONS I, Ernest R.
Johnson, Chief Financial Officer of Cutter & Buck Inc., certify that: 1.I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report of Cutter & Buck Inc.; 2.Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3.Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report; 4.The
registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a.Designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared; b.Evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; and c.Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and 5.The
registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a.All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and b.Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting. Dated: December 15, 2003
  /s/ Ernest R.
  JohnsonErnest R. JohnsonChief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)  27


---
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, of The First
Bancshares, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David E. Johnson, the Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 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 Section 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.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ David E. JohnsonName:

David E. JohnsonTitle:

Chief Executive OfficerDate:

November 14, 2008


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The First Bancshares, Inc., and will be retained by The First
Bancshares, Inc., and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
sybx-ex10142_240.htm



 

Exhibit 10.14.2

 

Synlogic, Inc.

301 Binney Street, Suite 402

Cambridge, MA 02142

 

 

To:         Antoine Awad

 

Date:      July 21, 2020

 

Re:         Promotion to COO 

 

 

 

Dear Tony,   

 

We are delighted to confirm your promotion to COO, effective July 1, 2020.  

 

In recognition of your promotion your compensation will be adjusted as follows: 

 


	
•
	
Base salary:   $376,000





	
•
	
Target Bonus:  40%





	
•
	
Promotion Equity Grant:  70,000 options




 

The balance of your terms and conditions remains unchanged and are therefore not re-stated here.  Please note:

 


	
•
	
Annual bonuses are discretionary and not guaranteed.  To be eligible for any such bonus, you must be employed by the Company in good standing at the time such bonus is paid.  





	
•
	
Equity awards are subject to the terms of the Company’s then applicable equity incentive plan (“Incentive Plan”) and form of option agreement, and subject to approval by the Board of Directors of the Company




 

Thank you for your contribution to Synlogic.  

 


	
Best wishes, 

	
SYNLOGIC, INC. 

	
By:
	
 
	
/s/ Aoife Brennan

	
Name:
	
 
	
Aoife Brennan

	
Title:
	
 
	
President & CEO
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1333 

To reinstate funding for the Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 18, 2013 

Mr. BEGICH (for himself, Ms. LANDRIEU, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. CASEY, and Mr. 

NELSON) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To reinstate funding for the Consumer Operated and 

Oriented Plan program. 

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 ‘‘Increased Competition 

5 for Consumers Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REINSTATEMENT OF FUNDING FOR THE CONSUMER 

7 OPERATED AND ORIENTED PLAN PROGRAM. 

8 (a) TRANSFER OF FUNDS.—The unobligated balance 

9 of the funds transferred under subsection (b)(1) of section 

10 644 of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (42 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1333 IS

1 U.S.C. 18042 note) to the fund established under sub2 section (a) of such section shall be transferred to the Con3 sumer Operated and Oriented Plan program established 

4 under section 1322 of the Patient Protection and Afford5 able Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18042) to remain available until 

6 expended. 

7 (b) APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 1322 of the Patient 

8 Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. 18042) is 

9 amended by striking subsection (g) and inserting the fol10 lowing: 

11 ‘‘(g) APPROPRIATIONS.—There are hereby appro12 priated the amount equal to the amount rescinded under 

13 section 644(b)(2) of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 

14 2012.’’. 

15 (c) TIME FOR AWARDING LOANS AND GRANTS.— 

16 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1322(b)(2) of the 

17 Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (42 

18 U.S.C. 18042(b)(2)) is amended by striking sub19 paragraph (D). 

20 (2) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made 

21 by paragraph (1) shall take effect as if enacted as 

22 part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care 

23 Act (Public Law 111–148). 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Latest version of O3 NPR

Lydia Wegman to: dmancini, hking 12/29/2009 09:32 AM

Cc: Gina McCarthy, Karen Martin

Bcc: Tricia Crabtree

Dom and Heidi, 

I hope you both had, or are continuing to have, a good holiday break. 

I'm sending along a revised version of the ozone package that reflects a few more changes from the 

package I sent the week before last. The key change from that version is a rewrite of the two sentences 

on page 23 that discuss the history of the March 2008 review of the secondary standard. There is also a 

related change on page 307. This package is a redline compared to the October 20 draft proposed rule, 

so there are several other changes as well which I previously sent to Heidi the week before last. Please 

let me know if you have any questions. 

Lydia
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Margie L. MEEKS.

No. 62548.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 3, 1978.

In re: Margie L. Meeks, applying for remedial writs of certiorari, prohibition, mandamus and a stay order. Parish of Vernon.

Granted. The case is remanded to the trial court to permit relator to refute the content of those portions of the presentence investigation as recited by the trial judge at the time of sentencing. The sentence heretofore imposed is set aside and defendant is to be resentenced in the light of the hearing on remand.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1257 

To protect financial transactions in the United States from enforcement 

of certain excise taxes imposed by any foreign government, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 27, 2013 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To protect financial transactions in the United States from 

enforcement of certain excise taxes imposed by any foreign government, 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 ‘‘Protect American In5 vestments Act of 2013’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1257 IS

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON THE UNITED STATES PERSONS 

2 PAYING FOREIGN FINANCIAL TRANSACTION 

3 TAX. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—A United States based company, 

5 entity, or person shall be prohibited from paying a finan6 cial transaction tax which is imposed by a foreign country 

7 on any covered financial transaction. 

8 (b) ACTIONS BY SECRETARY.—The Secretary of the 

9 Treasury— 

10 (1) not later than 90 days after the date of the 

11 enactment of this Act, shall promulgate such regula12 tions or other guidance, and 

13 (2) may take such other actions, 

14 as may be necessary or appropriate to carry out subsection 

15 (a). 

16 SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON UNITED STATES ASSISTANCE IN 

17 COLLECTING CERTAIN TAXES, ETC. 

18 The Secretary of the Treasury may not assist any 

19 foreign government with respect to the collection of any 

20 excise tax, related penalty, or related judgment by a court 

21 of a foreign country or by a foreign government on any 

22 covered financial transaction. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1257 IS

1 SEC. 4. PROTECTION OF FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS IN THE 

2 UNITED STATES FROM ENFORCEMENT OF EX3 CISE TAX IMPOSED BY FRANCE. 

4 The Secretary of the Treasury shall apply paragraph 

5 4 of Article 29 of the Convention Between the Government 

6 of the United States of America and the Government of 

7 the French Republic for the Avoidance of Double Taxation 

8 and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion With Respect to 

9 Taxes on Income and Capital, entered into force on or 

10 after January 1, 1996, to exempt covered financial trans11 actions. 

12 SEC. 5. DEFINITIONS. 

13 For purposes of this Act— 

14 (1) COVERED FINANCIAL TRANSACTION.—The 

15 term ‘‘covered financial transaction’’ means a finan16 cial transaction occurring on a United States ex17 change or over the counter within the United States, 

18 notwithstanding the nationality of the issuer of such 

19 security or the residence of any party to the trans20 action. 

21 (2) SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY.—The term 

22 ‘‘Secretary of the Treasury’’ includes any delegate of 

23 the Secretary. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for 1

the District of Nebraska.

___________

No. 96-1833

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the 

* District of Nebraska.

Wendell Lee Johnson, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

__________

 Submitted: October 7, 1996

 Filed: October 10, 1996

__________

Before BOWMAN, MAGILL, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Wendell Lee Johnson appeals the district court's denial of his

1

motion to vacate his conviction as violative of the Double Jeopardy Clause

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Johnson asserted that his property was

forfeited prior to his conviction and sentence, and that his failure to

raise this double jeopardy claim in his direct criminal appeal was due to

the ineffective assistance of his counsel. We conclude that Johnson's

double jeopardy claim is foreclosed for the reasons set forth in United

States v. Ursery, 116 S. Ct. 2135, 2148-49 (1996) (holding civil

forfeitures under 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6) and (7) are neither "punishment"

nor criminal for purposes of double jeopardy), and United States v. One

1970
-2-

36.9' Columbia Sailing Boat, 91 F.3d 1053, 1056-57 (8th Cir. 1996) (holding

Ursery applies to forfeitures under section 881(a)(4)). We also agree with

the district court that Johnson's ineffective assistance claim fails, as

he was not prejudiced by his counsel's failure to raise a meritless double

jeopardy claim. See Dyer v. United States, 23 F.3d 1424, 1426 (8th Cir.

1994).

Accordingly, we affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Document

 Exhibit 10.15

North Tower, LLC
c/o Brookfield Properties
250 Vesey Street, 15th Floor
New York, NY 10281


August 12, 2020


Via Electronic Mail


Citibank, N.A.
scott.dunlevie@citi.com


Attention: Scott Dunlevie




Re:    North Tower, LLC  - 333 S. Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, California 


Reference is hereby made to that certain loan (with a maximum committed balance of $400,000,000) issued pursuant to that certain Loan Agreement dated as of September 21, 2018 (the “Loan Agreement”), between North Tower, LLC (“Borrower”), Citibank, N.A. (“Administrative Agent”), Citigroup Global Markets Inc. and Natixis, New York Branch, collectively, as Lead Arranger, and the Financial Institutions Party listed therein, as Lenders.  Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Loan Agreement. 


            Pursuant to Section 2.9 of the Loan Agreement, Borrower is hereby exercising its option to extend the term of the Loan from the Initial Maturity Date, set to occur October 9, 2020, to the first Extended Maturity Date occurring October 9, 2021 by giving written notice to Administrative Agent not more than ninety (90) days, but not less than thirty (30) days, prior to the Initial Maturity Date.       
Please feel free to contact Jason Kirschner at Jason.kirchner@brookfieldproperties.com or (212.417.2521) directly with any questions.
Please countersign this letter in the space provided below confirming your approval to the matters contained herein. Thank you.




Very truly yours, 


						
	

North Tower, LLC 




By:/s/Jason Kirschner
Name: Jason Kirschner 
Title: Authorized Signatory 
	













 Exhibit 10.15







Acknowledged and agreed to by:


ADMINISTRATIVE AGENT


CITIBANK, N.A.




By:___________________
Name:  
Title:
The 

### THE BAlTIMORE SUN BALTIMORE, IIARYLAND 21278-0001 CERT1FY that 

## 20..02. was publtshed 

### In “THE BALTEMORE SUN” 

### a daily newspaper printed and published 

# ut the City ofBakimore....LQ.).). 7 LQ..7 7331
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT
SEC ARD POOLS INC , a C a lifornia C orporation; JOE SEC ARD; EDM OND SEC ARD, Pla i ntiffs-Appe lla nts,
v. KINSALE INSUR

ANC E C OM PANY, a

n Arkansa s C orporat ion,

De fe nda n t-Appe l le e . No. 17-55534 D.C . No. 5:16-c v-02404-JFW -SP
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the C e ntra l Distric t of C a lifornia John F. W a lte r, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Argue d a nd Subm itte d July

9, 2018 Pa sa de n a , C a l ifornia B e fore : PAEZ, FISHER , * * and C HR ISTEN, C irc uit Judge s. Pla intiffs a

ppe a l a n orde r e nte ring sum

m ary judgm e nt in fa

vor of de fe nda

nt Kinsa l e Insura

nc e C om pa ny . W e have jurisdic tion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a nd 

# FIL ED JUL 26 2018 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

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

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

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The Honora

ble D. M ic h a e l Fishe r, Unite d Stat e s C irc uit Judge for the U.S. C ourt of Appe a l s for the Third C irc uit, sitting by de signa t ion.we a ffirm
.

1. Kinsa l e did not bre a c h its insura nc e c ontra c t with Pla intiffs be c a use the insura nc e polic y ’ s IP Exc lusion una m biguously e x c lude s a ll the c la im s in the SSR
a c tion from

any pote n tia l for c o ve ra ge . W ith re spe c t to SSR ’ s a lle gations of misle a ding a dve rtising, those
a lle gations did not trigge

r Kinsa le ’ s duty to de fe n d unde r the c irc um s ta nc e s. Prong thre e of the IP Exc lusion e xpre ssly e xc l ude s from

c ove ra g e any

c la im “ arising out of any . . . produc ts or goods m anufa c ture d, sold, ha ndle d or distribute d or work
c om ple t e d by the Insure d . . . in viola

tion of a ny la w . . . inc luding viola

tions of the Lanha m Ac t or othe r unfa ir c o m

pe tition sta

tute s.” SSR

did not a lle ge any
m isle a ding a dve rtising by Pla intiffs se pa

rate and a p a rt from re pre se ntat ions tha

t
a ppe are d on the Se c ard Pools produc ts the m se lve s, a nd at ora l a

rgum e nt in this
c a se Pla intiffs c o u ld not ide ntify any suc h a lle gations in the

unde rly ing a c t ion. On the s e fa c t s, the IP Exc lusion re m ove d a ny pote ntia l for c ove ra ge . 2. B e c a use Kinsa l e did not bre a c h the insura nc e a gre e m e nt, pla intiffs’ c la im for bre a c h of the im

plie d c ove na

nt of good fa i th a

nd fa ir de a ling a lso fa ils a s a
m a tte r of la

w. Se e W alle r v . Truc k

Ins. Ex c h., Inc
. , 900 P.2d 619, 639 (C a l. 1995) (c onc l uding tha

t in the a bse n c e of a

n “ obliga tion to de fe nd or inde m

n ify . . . [the insure r] did not bre a c h the im plie d c ove na

nt of good fa ith a

nd fa ir de a ling” ).
2AFFIRM E D.

3
#### H. B. CARTER ESTATE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. MIAMI CAFETERIA, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 69-15.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Oct. 1, 1969.

Leonard C. Carter, Lakeland, for appellant.

Robert Trohn, of Langston, Massey, Trohn & Williams, Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Stemmler, et al. v. Moon Jewelry, Inc., (Fla.App.1st 1962), 139 So.2d 150.

LILES, Acting C. J., and MANN and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
#### Karl Jon PORTER and Julius Anthony Byrd, Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 71-862, 71-884.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 17, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0668 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CLAYTON DOUGLAS KIRN,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 18, 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 9 2024

02/09/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0668