alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1209

CURLEE SHERMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Orangeburg. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-03-3712-5-24BC) Submitted: June 25, 2004 Decided: July 19, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curlee Sherman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Curlee Sherman seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his complaint alleging claims under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics , 403 U.S. 388 (1971). The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Sherman that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Sherman failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Sherman has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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. DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Mission Broadcasting, Inc. (the Company), hereby certifies that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2007 (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: August 8, 2007



/s/ DAVID S. SMITHDavid S. SmithPresident and Treasurer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350 and is
not deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. The foregoing certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
EXHIBIT 31.1

                           CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT
                        AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Adam Mauerberger, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Atlantic Wine
Agencies, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the
registrant and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures 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 quarterly report
         is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
         and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
         this quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c) presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the
         effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
         evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's
auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
         controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
         record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
         identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
         internal controls; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
         other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
         internal controls; and

<PAGE>

6. I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were
significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could
significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of my most recent
evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant
deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: August 9, 2005

/s/ Adam Mauerberger
---------------------------
Name: Adam Mauerberger
Title: President and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.1


Red Arrow Gold Corporation


623 Grand Ave., Mancos, CO 81328


CO Office: 970-533-1428 AZ Office:
623-551-4128 Craig's Cell: 970-560-0685


 


 


February 1, 2012


 


 


Mr. Rocky V. Emery


Chairman/CEO -Rock Energy Resources, Inc.


Managing Member – American Patriot Gold


Houston, Texas 77042


 


Dear Mr. Emery:


 


The Red Arrow Gold Corporation (RAGC) Board of Directors is pleased
for you to consider the following proposal for purchase of the remaining 51% of the Red Arrow Mine related assets of our Company
by American Patriot Gold (APG). RAGC proposes the following for your consideration subject to 66-2/3% RAGC Shareholder approval;


 


·      APG
will purchasethe remaining 51% interest in the Red Arrow Mine assets of RAGC for $10,000,000; $3,500,000 at closing followed by
monthly payments of $200,000 at 5% Annual Percentage Rate (APR)until fully paid.


·      RAGC
will use a major portion of APGpayments to pay off its liabilities.


·      At
closing, 40,000,000 shares of Rock Energy Resources, Inc. (RCKE) will be issued to RAGC. 


·      Current
RAGC employees will receive 2,000,000 shares worth of RCKE stock options as part of an employee incentive program to be governed
by a compensation committee. Health insurance benefits will also be provided. 






    	 



    	 



    
 


·      APG
will pay allcurrent and future operational expenses for the project including associated permits and reclamation costs, and will
hold RAGC harmless for any and all actions arising from future operations of APG. 


·     RAGC
will receive a perpetual 5% Net Smelter Return (NSR) which allows mining, milling and smelting costs associated with the Red Arrow
Mine property.RAGC will receive a perpetual 5% NSR for allmineral rights acquired by APG, or its designee within a five mile radius
of the Red Arrow Mine. Royalties in favor of RAGC will survive a sale. 


·      APG
agrees to allow RAGC personnel to observe APG operations. APG further agreesto provide RAGC with copies of all information gathered
during its geological investigations along with an adequate portion of core and/ormineral samples. 


·     The Silver Wing Mine and Freda Mine are not included in the asset sale.


The Board of Directors of Red Arrow Gold Corp and Rock Energy Resources,
Inc. have approved this transaction. This offer will remain in effect up to and including May 2, 2012. Thank you for your consideration.


 


Sincerely,


/S/ Craig Liukko


 


Craig Liukko - President/CEO


Red Arrow Gold Corporation


 





 


 


Accepted this 1st day of February, 2012


 


 


 


/s/ Rocky V. Emery_______________


Rocky V. Emery - Chairman/CEO


Rock Energy Resources, Inc.


Managing Member- American Patriot Gold
Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm  The
Board of Directors CollaGenex
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.:  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-31229,
No. 333-73230, No. 333-112564 and No. 333-131247) on Form S-8
and the registration statements (No. 333-88697, No. 333-35634,
No. 333-53766, No. 333-58568, No. 333-67044, No. 333-72166,
No. 333-87556, No. 333-102773, No. 333-103008, No. 333-107918,
No. 333-128334, No. 333-131295, No. 333-131655 and No.
333-141947) on Form S-3 of CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. of
our reports dated March 17, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance
sheets of CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31,
2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity and  cash flows for
each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and
the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2007, which reports appear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K
of CollaGenex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.  Our
report on the consolidated financial statements refers to the Companys
adoptions of the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
effective January 1, 2007 and Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123R,
Share-Based Payment, effective January 1, 2006.  /s/  KPMG LLP  Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania March 17,
2008
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.22


                              AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE
            TO THE POST PROPERTIES, INC. PROFIT SHARING/sec. 401(K) PLAN
             AS AMENDED AND RESTATED EFFECTIVE AS OF JANUARY 1, 1994


        Pursuant to sec. 13.1 of the Post Properties, Inc. Profit Sharing/sec.
401(k) Plan as amended and restated effective as of January 1, 1984 ("Plan"),
Post Properties, Inc. hereby amends the Plan as follows:

                                       1.

        By amending sec. 3.19, Forfeiture, to substitute "sec. 8.4" for "sec.
8.5" where it appears in such section.

                                       2.

        By amending sec. 6.1, Plan Sponsor and Company Action, to delete the
last paragraph of such section.

                                       3.

        By amending sec. 6.5, Account Debits and Allocation of Adjustment, to
add the following sentence to the end of such section:

         "For purposes of allocating the Adjustment for any Valuation Date, the
         balance of an Account shall include the Before-Tax Contributions
         credited to such Accounts as of such Valuation Date but shall exclude
         the Profit Sharing Contributions credited to such Account as of such
         Valuation Date."

                                       4.

        By amending subsection (2) of sec. 8.4(d), Forfeiture, to read as
follows:

         "(2) the last day of the Plan Year in which the Employee's employment
         as such terminates, unless he or she is reemployed as an Employee on or
         before such date."




<PAGE>   2



                                       5.

        By amending sec. 13.1, Amendment, to add the following sentence to the
end of such section:

        "Any amendments to the Plan shall be in writing and shall be signed by
        the Chairman or the President of the Plan Sponsor or their delegate."

                                       6.

        This Amendment Number One shall be effective retroactively to January
1, 1994.

        IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Post Properties, Inc. has executed this Amendment
Number One this 15th day of July, 1994.



  (CORPORATE SEAL)                               POST PROPERTIES, INC.

                                                 By:/s/
                                                    ---------------------------

                                                 Title: Sr. Vice President
ATTEST:/s/ Sherry W. Cohen                             ------------------------
       -------------------------
Title: Sr. V.P. & Secretary
       -------------------------




                                      -2-
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Trimeris, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended December 31, 2006 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert R. Bonczek, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 the Company.



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ ROBERT R. BONCZEK  
|Robert R. Bonczek      
|                       
|Chief Financial Officer
|March 16, 2007         



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
#### FELIX REMISIEWSKI, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. PARODI CIGAR COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., DEFENDANT-PETITIONER.

See same case below: 1 N. J. Super. 249 ; 64 A. 2nd 93.

*Messrs.*Milton, *McNulty & Augelli*and *Mr. Joseph Keane*for the petitioner.

*Mr. Andrew O. Wittreich*and *Mr. Robert J. Rubacky*for the respondent.

June 13, 1949.

Denied.
ex10_8.htm










TWENTY-EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT












This Twenty-Eighth Amendment to Employment Agreement is made and entered into as of October 1, 2011, by and between PriceSmart, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (“Employer”) and Robert M. Gans (“Executive”).







Recitals








	
A)  

	
On September 20, 1994 an Employment Agreement was made and entered into by and between Executive and Price Enterprises, Inc.













	
B)  

	
Said Employment Agreement has been assigned to Employer and amended on twenty-seven prior occasions;













	
C)  

	
Employer and Executive now desire to further amend the Employment Agreement, as set forth hereinbelow:












Agreement








	
1.  

	
Section 3.1 of the Employment Agreement, which currently provides:












3.1      Term.  The term of Executive's employment hereunder shall commence on October 17, 1994 and shall continue until October 16, 2011 unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided (the "Employment Term").







is hereby amended, to provide as follows:







3.1      Term.  The term of Executive's employment hereunder shall commence on October 17, 1994 and shall continue until October 16, 2012 unless sooner terminated or extended as hereinafter provided (the “Employment Term”).



	  











	
  

	
2. All other terms of the Employment Agreement, as amended, shall remain unaltered and fully effective.












Executed in San Diego, California, as of the date first written above.












EXECUTIVE                                                                                     EMPLOYER


PRICESMART, INC.







Robert M. Gans                                                                           By:           







______________________                                                    Name:        Jose Luis Laparte                                







                          Its:           CEO and President
### UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION


### MEMORANDUM February 4, 2014 

### SUBJECT: Tolerance Proposal for FJuxaproxad on the Remaining Cereal Grain Crops. PC Code: 138009 Decision No.: 466686

TXRNo
. : NA MRIDNo.: NA 

### FROM: Thurston G. Morton, Chemist Ri sk Assessment Branch 4 

### Health Effect s Division (7509P) DP Barcode: , 4 I 7588 Registration No.: 7969-306 , 7969-307, 7969- 308, 7969-309 , 7969-310, 7969-311, 7969-3] 2, 7969-GLE, 7969-GUO , 7969-GLN



### THROUGH: E li ssa Reaves , Ph.D. , Branch Chief 

# t_;**~;:G** 

# - Risk Assessment Branch 

### 4 , RED (7509P) ( 

### TO: Olga Odiott, Risk Manager Insecticide Branch Registration Division (7505P)

This document provid es the r evised tolerances and commodity definitions for certain commodities from those listed in the Health Effec ts Division' s (RED 's) ri s k assess ment 

### (T. Morton, 7/25/13, D403 9 J 2).Concurrent with the establishment of the proposed tolerance for Rice, grain at 5
.0 ppm under 180.666(a), the tolerances for Grain, cereal, group 15, (except corn, field, grain; except corn, pop, grain; except corn, kernels plus cobs with husks removed; except wheat) should be amended to the following : 

### Grain, cereal, group 15, (except corn, field, grain; except corn, pop, grain; except corn, kernels plus cobs with husks removed; except rice; except wheat). In addition, the registrant bas proposed tolerances for almond and pecan, the representative crops of the tree nut crop group 14. Therefore, the risk assessment included all commodities for the group and a tolerance for tree nuts can be established at 0.06 ppm. In addition the current to lerance for stone fruit can be amended to Fruit, stone, group 12

- 12 at 3.0 ppm.

Tabl e I. Recommended Tolerances for Fluxapyroxad Crop Group or Commodity Proposed Recommended Comments; Corr ect Commod ity Definition Tol erance Tole rance (ppm) (ppm} Rice , bran 8.5 8
. 5 Rice, bran Rice , grain 5
. 0 5.0 Rice , grain Rice, hull s 15
.0 15 Rice. hulls Rice , straw 20.0 none Covered by existing tolerance on Grain, cereal, foraj!e, fodder and straw, group 16
Grain , cereal, group 15 , (except com, field , grain ; except corn, pop , grain ; except 3
.0 corn, kernels plus cobs with husks removed ; except rice ; except wheat).
Nut, tree, group 14-1 2 0.06 Almond , hulls 4.0 4.0 Fruit, stone , group 12-1 2 3.0
<PAGE>

Exhibit 31.2

Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, James M. Mitchell, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Family Home Health
Services, 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 consolidated 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. I am 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision,
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) 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

(d) 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the registrant's
board of directors:

(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.

August 15, 2005                     /s/ James M. Mitchell
                                   ------------------------------------
                                   James M. Mitchell
                                   Chief Financial Officer
#### BEACH COMMUNICATIONS, INC., Maxtel Limited Partnership, Pacific Cablevision and Western Cable Communications, Inc., Petitioners, v. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION and United States of America, Respondents, Spectradyne, Inc., National Cable Television Association, Inc., Wireless Cable Association, Inc., Southwestern Bell Corporation and Hughes Communications Galaxy, Inc., Intervenors.

No. 91-1089.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Decided Oct. 22, 1993.

Publication Ordered Dec. 21, 1993.

Deborah C. Costlow and Thomas C. Power, Washington, DC, were on the brief for petitioners.

John E. Ingle, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, F.C.C., Renee Licht, Acting Gen. Counsel, F.C.C., Frank W. Hunger, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Douglas N. Letter and Bruce G. Forrest, Attys., U.S. Dept, of Justice, Washington, DC, were on the brief for respondents.

Before MIKVA, Chief Judge, EDWARDS and GINSBURG, Circuit Judges.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT

PER CURIAM:

Upon motion by respondents pursuant to Local Rule 14(e), the Court directs that the order'herein, issued by the Court on October 22, 1993, be published. The order reads as follows:

*ORDER*

This cause came before the court upon petition for review of an order of the Federal Communications Commission and is presently on remand from the Supreme Court, — U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 2096, 124 L.Ed.2d 211. Upon consideration of the supplemental briefs of the parties filed pursuant to the order of July 29, 1993, it is

*Ordered,*by the Court, that the petition for review is dismissed. We find that there is no basis for application of a heightened scrutiny standard as claimed by petitioners and, therefore, there is no remaining meritorious issue to be considered.

The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. *See*D.C.Cir.Rule 15.