alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITE D STATE S ENVIRONMENTA L PROTECTIO N AGENC Y REGIO N 5 7 7 WES T JACKSO N BOULEVAR D CHICAGO , I L 60604-359 0 

## J A N2 2 200 9

REPL Y T O TH E ATTENTIO N OF : A-18 J
Dougla s Harris , Genera l Manage r Veoli aE S Technica l Solutions , L.L.C

. 7 Mobil e Avenu e Sauget , Illinoi s 6220 1
Dea r Mr

. Harris :
I a mwritin g i n follow-u p to th e phon e conversatio n o f January 6 , 2009 , yo u ha dwit h Geneviev e Damic o an dCharle s Hall , o f m y staff , an dth e January 6 , 2009 , revisio n to you r significan t

modificatio n application

. I n Novembe r o f 2008 , yo u discovere dtha t th e fee drat e calculation s submitte do n Octobe r 10 , 2008 , di dno t

properl y accoun t

fo r th e moistur e conten t

o f th e soli dwast e fe ddurin g th e Augus t 200 8 an dSeptembe r

200 8 performanc e tests

. O n Januar y 6 , 2009 , yo u submitted , a s arevisio n to you r

significan t

modificatio n application , operatin g parameter

limit s (OPLs ) recalculate dto accoun t fo r th e moistur e content

. In orde r fo r U

. S

. Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y to evaluat e th e Octobe r 10 , 2008 , reques t

an d subsequen t

January 6 , 200 9 revision , w e wil l nee dth e underlyin g informatio n Veoli aE S Technica l Solution s (Veolia ) use dto develo p thes e OPLs

. Pleas e submi t the followin g to EPA :
1

. Th e laborator y report(s ) fo r th e 200 8 performanc e test s includin g the percen t moistur e o r percen t solids ; 2

. A statement

identifyin g whether

the highes t

fee drate s o f

eac h mercury , sem i volatil e metal s (SVM) , an dlo w volatil e metal s (LVM ) fro meac h combusto r uni t fro m Jul y 1 , 200 4 throug h January 1 , 2008 , submitte dto Charle s Hal l vi ae-mai l o n Decembe r

5 an d10 , 2008 , ar

e o n adr y o r

we t basis , an dacertificatio n to th e trut h an d accurac y o f

the dataan dth e statement ; an d 3

. A statement

identifyin g whether

eac h o f th e 200 8 performanc e tes t fee drate s o f

mercury , S V M an dLV M to eac h combusto r uni t submitte do n Octobe r

10 , 2008 , ar

e o n adr y o r we t basis , an dcertificatio n to th e accurac y o f th e dat aan dth e statement

. o z O

Recycled/Recyclabl e • Printe d wit h Vegetabl e Oi l Base d Ink s o n 100 % Recycle d Pape r(50 % Postconsumer )EP A ha s suspende devaluatin g Veolia' s Octobe r 10 , 2008 , extrapolatio n reques t pendin g thi s information

. I f

yo u hav e any question s regardin g th e letter , pleas e contac t Geneviev e Damic o o r Charle s Hall , o f

m y staff , a

t (312 ) 353-476 1 an d(312 ) 353-3443 , respectively

.

Sincerely ,

Cheryl L.'Newto n --directo r Ai r an dRadiatio n Divisio n

cc : Laure l Kroack , Illinoi s Environmenta l Protectio n Agenc y
ex_386239.htm


 


Exhibit 4.9


 





 


September 21, 2017


 


Fahar Merchant

1920 Yonge Street, 2nd Floor

Toronto, ON


 


Dear Fahar:


 


We are asking you to agree to certain changes to your written employment agreement dated January 1, 2013 and as amended March 1, 2015 and October 1, 2016 (your “Employment Agreement”) a copy of which is enclosed with this amendment letter).


 


We have set out the changes that will be made to the terms of your Employment Agreement, below. Please sign and return this document to indicate your acceptance of these changes. Once you have accepted the changes, this document will constitute an official amendment to the terms of your Employment Agreement.


 


	 	
			1.

				
			Change to your Base Salary – Section 3.1(a) will be modified to reflect your new Base Salary of Cdn $375,000 which is effective as of April 1, 2017.

			



 


	 	
			2.

				
			Changes to your Bonus Structure – Section 3.3 will be modified to reflect your new bonus rate of 40 percent.

			



 


Finally, all other terms and conditions of your Employment Agreement shall remain the same.


 


Thank you for taking the time to carefully consider this letter. Please return a signed copy at your earliest convenience. In the meantime, if you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.


 


Yours Sincerely,


 


Medicenna Therapeutics Inc.


 


	
			Signed:

				
			/s/ Elizabeth Williams

				 



 


Encl. Your Employment Agreement


 


I hereby agree to amend the terms and conditions of my Employment Agreement, as described above. All remaining terms and conditions of my employment will remain in effect, unchanged by this consent.


 


	
			Signed:

				/s/Fahar Merchant	 	
			Date: Sept. 21________, 2017

			
	
			Fahar Merchant
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Agricultural Marketing Service’s, 

Grain Inspection Advisory Committee

June 20, 2022

Dear AMS Grain Advisory Committee,

In recent years, our industry has been seeing a higher percent of soybeans of 

other color (SBOC) in the crop due to the E3 trait in the soybean seed supply.

Soybeans with this trait under certain stressors can experience a virus-like 

response in the bean resulting in a seed-hull that is lightly discolored. Being a 

virus, fungicides cannot eliminate the response. Based on our experience and 

what we are hearing from the industry, the 2021 crop had a much higher 

incidence of SBOC.

We cannot speak for other companies, but this issue has created a significant 

challenge in selling soybeans into the export market. We have had to delay 

shuttle train billings and accept monetary discounts due to this factor alone.

Consistent recognition and grading of this particular color (smokey gray) is 

difficult because there are varying degrees of discoloration. We have concerns 

that the consistency in grading may be an issue between federally licensed 

graders as well. 

While it will take time and research to find remedies to fix this trait issue and 

determine the true effect of SBOC on processor and export markets, we would 

look for a more immediate modification to the Soybean Grain Grading Standards.

As we read the standards, SBOC and mottled have the same issue of discoloration 

of the hull but are considered differently in the grading process. We would ask 

that this type of SBOC be graded and noted consistent with mottled soybeans.

We appreciate the time this committee is dedicating to working through this 

concern and look forward to industry collaborative input.

Sincerely,

Jeff Bechard

Central Valley Ag

Sr VP of Grain

jeff.bechard@cvacoop.com | 402-362-8489
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 Certification pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 I, Peter E. Jokiel, Chief Financial Officer of Specialty Underwriters
Alliance, Inc. (the Company), pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, do hereby certify as follows: (i) The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company
for the period ended September 30, 2004 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 such Form 10-Q
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company. IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certification this 23rd day of
December 2004. /s/ Peter E. JokielPeter E. Jokiel
Chief Financial Officer A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Specialty Underwriters Alliance, Inc. and will be retained by
Specialty Underwriters Alliance, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Site visit review of the Nanoscale Science and Engineering Center (NSEC) at University of California—Santa Barbara by the Division of Social and Economic Sciences (10748).                    

*Dates & Times:*                         May 6, 2012; 7 p.m.-9 p.m., May 7, 2012: 8 a.m.-9:15 p.m., May 8, 2012: 8 a.m.-3:30 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         University of California, Santa Barbara, California.                    

*Type Of Meeting:*                         Part open.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Frederick Kronz, Program Director; Science, Technology, and Society Program; Division of Social and Economic Sciences, Room 990, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone (703) 292-7283.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning further support of the NSEC at the University of California, Santa Barbara.                    

*Agenda:*

## Sunday, May 6, 2012

7 p.m.-9 p.m. Closed—Executive Session

## Monday, May 7, 2012

8 a.m.-4 p.m. Open—Review of the NSEC

4 p.m.-5:30 p.m. Closed—Executive Session

5:30 p.m.-9 p.m. Open—Poster Session; Dinner

## Tuesday, May 8, 2012

8 a.m.-9 a.m. Closed—Executive session

9 a.m.-10:30 a.m. Open—Review of the NSEC

10:45 a.m.-4:15 p.m. Closed—Executive Session, Draft and Review Report

*Reason for Closing:*                         The work being reviewed may include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal information concerning individuals associated with the MRSEC. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552 b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.                    

Dated: April 18, 2012.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2012-9695 Filed 4-20-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Exhibit 12.1   NSTAR Electric Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges Year Ended December 31, 2008 (in thousands)   Net income from continuing operations$223,897Less: equity income from investees820Plus: distributed income of equity investees416Income taxes141,847Fixed charges (including securitization certificates)102,100Total$467,440Interest expense$94,445Interest component of rentals (estimated as one-third of rental expense)7,655Total$102,100Ratio of earnings to fixed charges4.58     Exhibit 12.2   NSTAR Electric Company Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividend Requirements Year Ended December 31, 2008 (in thousands)    Net income from continuing operations (before preferred stock dividend)$223,897Less: equity income from investees820Plus: distributed income of equity investees416Income taxes141,847Fixed charges (including securitization certificates)102,100Total$467,440Interest expense$94,445Interest component of rentals (estimated as one-third of rental expense)7,655Subtotal102,100Preferred stock dividend requirements3,202Total$105,302Ratio of earnings to fixed charges and preferred stock dividend requirements4.44
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-21-00248-CV

DANIEL CHRISTOPHER TAYLOR

v.

BERGSTROM, INC.

On Appeal from the

343rd District Court of Bee County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. B-18-1628-CV-C-1

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

June 15, 2023
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of PortalPlayer, Inc., on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Gary Johnson, President and Chief Executive Officer, and I, Svend-Olav Carlsen, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, certify,
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:

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

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

Dated:
May 9, 2006



|                                      |  |  |  |                                           
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------------------------
|/s/ GARY JOHNSON                      |  |  |  | /s/SVEND-OLAV CARLSEN                     
|Gary Johnson                          |  |  |  | Svend-Olav Carlsen                        
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our report included in this Form 10-K, into Tom Brown, Inc.'s previously
filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 Nos. 33-42991, 33-44225, 33-60191,
33-60842, 33-13157, 33-30069, 33-42011, 333-56577, 333-69353, 333-31426,
333-89031, 333-89033, 333-31426 and 333-51320.


                                                             ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
Denver, Colorado
March 13, 2001
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.39




March 1, 2002
                                                                 VIA FACSIMILIE
US DIAGNOSTIC INC.                                               561-833-1598
250 S. AUSTRALIAN AVE., 9TH FL.
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401

Attn.:   Mr. Andy Shaw

Re:    LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 27, 1997 BY AND BETWEEN US
       DIAGNOSTIC, INC. ("Borrower") AND DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION
       ("Lender") (as amended from time to time, the "Loan Agreement")

Dear Mr. Andy:

PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.7 OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT, LENDER DESIRES TO EXTEND THE
EXPIRATION DATE OF THE LOAN AGREEMENT FROM APRIL 1, 2002 TO JUNE 1, 2002 TO
PROVIDE US WITH ADDITIONAL TIME TO REVIEW YOUR CREDIT LINE FACILITY.

By your signature below, you hereby agree to the 60-day extension described
above. Lender reserves all of its rights and remedies provided under the Loan
Agreement and at law until all amounts owed by Borrower to Lender are paid in
full. Please sign below where indicated and fax to my attention at:
949-474-6199. In addition, please execute one original of this document and
return to my attention using the enclosed, postage paid envelope.

Should you have any questions with regard to this matter, please contact me at
(949) 474-5817 at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely,

DVI BUSINESS CREDIT CORPORATION




/s/ Alan Young
------------------------------------
     Alan Young, Account Executive

cc:  Mr. Jim Nachreiner, Vice President
     Ms. Missy Massingham, Vice President


ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO BY:

BORROWER:
US DIAGNOSTIC, INC.


By: /s/ Paul Andrew Shaw
    ---------------------------------
Print Name: Paul Andrew Shaw
            -------------------------
Title: EVP & CFO
       ------------------------------
Date: 3-5-02
      -------------------------------
Exhibit 35.1





Servicer Compliance Statement of AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.








This Annual Statement as to Compliance is delivered to you pursuant to Section 2.9 (c) of the 2023-1 Servicing Supplement dated as of January 2, 2023 (the “Agreement”) and Item 1123 of Regulation AB, executed in connection with the formation of GM Financial Automobile Leasing Trust 2023-1 (the “Trust”), the issuance of the Notes by the Trust and the closing of the transactions and the execution and delivery of the various documents by AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. (the “Servicer”) and GMF Leasing LLC in connection therewith.  The capitalized terms used herein shall have the same meanings as in the Agreement.





The undersigned certifies that I am the Executive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer of the Servicer.  I further certify as follows:





1. I have conducted, or caused to be conducted under my supervision, a review of the Servicer during the preceding period from February 16, 2023 through December 31, 2023, and its performance under the Agreement.





2. To the best of my knowledge, following such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all its obligations under the Agreement throughout such period, and, to the best of my knowledge, there has been no default in the fulfillment of any such obligation.








AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.





By:/s/ Connie CoffeyDated:March 4, 2024Connie CoffeyExecutive Vice President, Corporate Controller and Chief Accounting Officer
#### Nick PETERSON, Speridon, Simeonoff, Peder Nornes, Chris Russell and Eric Melhus, Appellants, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.

No. 3813.

Supreme Court of Alaska.

Aug. 3, 1979.

Gerald W. Markham, Markham & Fischer, Kodiak, for appellants.

John G. Gissberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., Anchorage, Avrum M. Gross, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee.

Before CONNOR, BOOCHEVER, BURKE and MATTHEWS, JJ., and COOKE, Judge.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellants were convicted by a jury in the district court at Kodiak, Superior Court Judge Roy H. Madsen presiding, of commercial fishing in closed waters, a violation of 5 AAC 39.290(a).1 Their convictions were affirmed by the superior court. On this appeal, they primarily contend that the trial court erred in denying their motion for judgment of acquittal. They argue that there was insufficient evidence to establish their identities as those involved in fishing *95a gill net stretched across the Humpy River, a major pink salmon spawning stream in the southwest part of Kodiak Island. We hold that the trial judge did not err in denying the motion since fair-minded people, in the exercise of reasonable judgment, could differ on the question of whether guilt had been established beyond a reasonable doubt.2

We find no merit in the additional contention that the trial court erred in refusing to admit the testimony of a veteran Kodiak fisherman as to an alleged custom of cutting nets found in salmon streams. There must be a factual foundation for an expert’s testimony.3 The theory that these commercial fishermen went ashore for the purpose of cutting a freshly strung net in an isolated area located upstream of the mouth of the river so as not to be visible from a boat strains credulity. There was no factual basis established to the effect that these fishermen observed the net while fishing, and went ashore for the purpose of cutting it. Nor was there any plausible evidence of why during fishing hours they went ashore and came across a freshly strung net in this isolated area. We therefore need not address the question of whether the proposed testimony would otherwise have been admissible.

The convictions are AFFIRMED.

RABINOWITZ, C. J., not participating.

1

. 5 AAC 39.290(a) reads as follows:

> Commercial fishing for salmon is prohibited at all times within the streams and rivers of Alaska and within a radius of 500 yards, both seaward and landward from a point beginning midway of a line between the seaward extremities of the exposed tideland banks at mean lower low water, of any salmon stream or as specified in regulations having particular application to designated streams or areas.

2

. *Des Jardins v. State,*551 P.2d 181, 184 (Alaska 1976).

3

. *Widmeyer v. Southeast Skyways, Inc.,*584 P.2d 1, 9 (Alaska 1978).
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 CB Richard Ellis Realty Trust (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Laurie E. Romanak, Chief 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:

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

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



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|                                         
|/S/    LAURIE E.
ROMANAK                 
|Laurie E. Romanak Chief Financial Officer

Date: November 12, 2010
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A1038. FRED GARDNER v. McCURDY & CANDLER, LLC et al. 

Before us is Appellee McCurdy & Candler, LLC’s motion to dismiss the

above-captioned appeal. This appeal was docketed on February 4, 2015. Asset forth

in Court of Appeals Rules 22 (a) and 23 (a), an appellant must file a brief and

enumeration of errors within 20 days of the date of docketing of the appeal. 

Therefore, Appellant’s brief and enumeration of errors was due no later than February

24, 2015. Appellant failed to file a brief and enumeration of errors or request an

extension of time in which to do so by this date. Based on the foregoing, Appellee’s

motion to dismiss is GRANTED and this appeal is hereby DISMISSED. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

03/30/2015

March 30, 2015