alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.3

                    AMENDMENT TO THE AMERICAN STORES COMPANY
                     1989 STOCK OPTION AND STOCK AWARD PLAN


The American Stores Company 1989 Stock Option and Stock Award Plan (the "1989
Plan") is hereby amended by deleting the first sentence of the third paragraph
of Section 19 of the 1989 Plan, in its entirety, and inserting the following
language in place thereof:

          Notwithstanding anything contained in the Plan to the contrary,
     during the 60-day period from and after a Change of Control an
     optionee (other than an optionee who initiated a Change of Control in
     a capacity other than as an officer or director of the Company) with
     respect to an option that is unaccompanied by a stock appreciation
     right shall, unless the Committee shall determine otherwise at the
     time of grant, have the right, in lieu of the payment of the full
     purchase price of the shares of common stock being purchased under the
     option and by giving written notice to the Company, to elect (within
     such 60-day period) to surrender all or part of the option to the
     Company and to receive in cash an amount equal to the amount by which
     the fair market value per share of the common stock on the date of
     exercise shall exceed the purchase price per share under the option
     multiplied by the number of shares of common stock granted under the
     option as to which the right granted by this paragraph shall have been
     exercised.

The 1989 Plan is further amended by deleting the fourth paragraph of Section 19
from the 1989 Plan, in its entirety, and inserting the following language in
place thereof:

          Notwithstanding anything contained in the Plan to the contrary,
     the payment in settlement of a stock appreciation right during the 60-
     day period from and after a Change of Control shall be entirely in
     cash and during the 60-day period from and after a Change of Control
     the value  of a share of common stock on the date of exercise shall
     mean (i) with respect to the exercise of a stock appreciation right
     accompanying an option which is not an incentive stock option, the
     `Change of Control Fair Market Value'' and (ii) with respect to the
     exercise of a stock appreciation right accompanying an incentive stock
     option, the mean of the high and low prices of the common stock on the
     New York Stock Exchange on such date.




                 CERTIFICATE OF ADOPTION BY BOARD OF DIRECTORS

     The undersigned, Mark N. Schneider, Vice President and Assistant Secretary
of American Stores Company, hereby certifies that the foregoing Amendment to the
American Stores Company 1989 Stock Option and Stock Award Plan was approved by
the Board of Directors of the Company at a regular meeting of the Board of
Directors duly called and held on September 17, 1996.


                                        /s/ Mark N. Schneider
                                   -----------------------------------

                                   Mark N. Schneider
                                   Vice President and Assistant Secretary
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-13663

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MICHAEL COTTONE, 

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 8:21-cr-00131-SDM-AEP-1

____________________

USCA11 Case: 23-13663 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 10/08/2024 Page: 1 of 2
2 Opinion of the Court 23-13663

Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas A. Burns, appointed counsel for Michael Cottone in 

this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further 

representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders 

v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the 

record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the 

appeal is correct. Because independent examination of the record 

reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw 

is GRANTED, and Cottone’s conviction and sentence are 

AFFIRMED.

USCA11 Case: 23-13663 Document: 34-1 Date Filed: 10/08/2024 Page: 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
RULE 13A-14(A) / 15D-14(A)
  1.
    
    I have read this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SIFCO Industries, 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.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers 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 internal
controls and procedures to be designated 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 quarterly report is being prepared; andb.
    
    paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238, 33-8545,34-51293
and 34-47986; andc.
    
    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
  5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officers 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 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; andb.
    
    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.
 Date: August 10, 2007
    
    
    
    /s/ Frank A. CappelloFrank A. CappelloVice President  Finance andChief Financial Officer
 1
**Exhibit 31.1**I, John R. Folkerth, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Shopsmith, Inc. (the “registrant”);2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared;b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; andc) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;andb) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.        Date: November 15, 2005
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4505 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4505

   To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty on certain 
                           women's footwear.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 24, 2012

  Mr. Carney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To extend and modify the temporary suspension of duty on certain 
                           women's footwear.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN WOMEN'S FOOTWEAR.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.23.83 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain women's footwear 
with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather, or composition leather 
and uppers of textile materials) is amended--
            (1) in the article description column, by striking ``$20/
        pair'' and inserting ``$24/pair''; and
            (2) by striking the date in the effective period column and 
        inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) apply to 
goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 
the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002**

 

I,John A. Roberts, the Chief Financial Officer of InfoLogix, Inc. (the “Company”),hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

·                  the Form 10-K of theCompany for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Form 10-K”), fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

·                  the information contained inthe Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

 
| Dated:  April 15, 2010 |     |
|-----------------------------|----------|
| * *                    | * * |
| /s/  JOHN A. ROBERTS        |     |
| John  A. Roberts            |     |
| *Chief Financial Officer*   |     |

 

----
|                                                                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                             
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                               
|View History: Annual                                                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                         
|View History:                                                                                                
|                                                                                                             
|Texas - RRC District 8 Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                             
|                                                                                                             
|Texas - RRC District 8 Crude Oil + Lease Condensate New Reservoir Discoveries in Old Fields (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                             

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 4     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 0      | 2      | 11     | 16     | 14     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT M AR IO OR OZC O GUTIER REZ, Pe titione r, v. LORETTA E. LYNC H, Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde n t . No. 12-73504 Age n c y No. A090-723-035 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d

M ay 13, 2015 ** B e fore : LEAVY, C ALLAHAN, a nd M . SM ITH, C i rc uit Judge s. M ario Oroz c o Gutie rre z , a native and c itiz e n

of M e xic o, pe titions for re vie w of the B o ard of Im

m igration Appe a ls’ orde r dism issing his a ppe a l from an im m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng his a pplic at ion for a s y lum , withholding of re m ova l, a

nd prote c tion unde r the C onve ntion Aga i nst Torture(“ C AT” ). W e have 

# F IL ED MAY29 2015 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

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

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

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without ora l a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide n c e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings, a pply ing the sta

nda rds gove rning a d

ve rse c re dibility de te rm i nations c re ate d

by the REAL ID Ac t, Shre

stha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039-40 (9th C ir. 2010), a nd we de ny

the pe tition for re vie w. Substa ntia l e v i de nc e supports the a ge nc y ’ s a dve rse c re dibility de t e rm ination ba se d on the inc onsiste nc e s be twe e n Oroz c o Gutie rre z ’ s te stim o ny and e vide nc e re ga rding the inc ide nts his mothe r and re lative s a lle ge dly e xpe rie n c e d in M e xic o. Se e id. at 1046-47 (“whe n a n inc onsiste nc y

is a t the he art of the c la im

it doubtle ss is of gre at we ight” ). In the a bse nc e of c re dible te stim ony , Oroz c o Gutie rre z ’ s a sy lum , inc luding humanita rian a sy lum , a

nd withholding of re

m ova l c la im s fa il. Se e Farah v . Ashc roft , 348 F.3d 1153, 1156 (9th C ir. 2003). Fina lly , substa

ntia l e v ide nc e a lso supports the a g e nc y ’ s de nia l of Oroz c o Gutie rre z ’ s C AT c la im be c a use he fa ile d to de m onstra t e it is m ore like l y

tha n not he would betorture d by

or with thec onse nt or a c quie sc e nc e of the gove rnm e nt if re turne d to M e xic o. Se e Silay a v . Muk ase y , 524 F.3d 1066, 1073 (9th C ir. 2008). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WDE NIE D.

1 2 - 7 3 5 0 4 2
**EXHIBIT 99.2**

**SECURITISATION ADVISORY SERVICES PTY.****LIMITED**

**OFFICER’S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE**

The undersigned officer of Securitisation Advisory Services Pty. Limited, a company organized under the laws of New South Wales, Australia (“SAS”), hereby certifies on behalf of SAS and on his own behalf for purposes of the Class A-1 and A-3 Mortgage-Backed Floating Rate Notes (the “Notes”), as follows:

| 1. | I am a duly appointed, qualified and acting Director of SAS;                                                                                                                                                                                    |
|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | I am duly authorized to execute and deliver this Officer’s Certificate on behalf of SAS; and                                                                                                                                               |
| 3. | To the best of my knowledge, the Issuer Trustee has complied with all conditions and covenants under the transaction documents for the Medallion Trust Series 2005-1G issue of Notes for the period between February 1, 2005 and June 30, 2005. |

Capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings assigned to such terms in the Prospectus Supplement related to the above-referenced issue of Notes.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have signed my name as of September20, 2005.

| By:  /s/            Marten Touw                                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Name:  Marten Touw

Title:  Director
#### LANGSTON v. STATE.

No. 23214.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 7, 1945.

Chas. H. Dean, of Plainview, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of a violation of the local option liquor laws in a dry area, and by the jury assessed a fine of $200; from a judgment predicated thereon, she appeals.

There are four bills of exceptions in the record, one of which contending that the affidavit for search warrant and the search warrant were invalid for the reason that no sufficient facts are stated in the affi*122davit showing probable cause for the issuance of the warrant. We find that practically the same language as used herein to show probable cause was approved by this court in the cases of Weaver v. State, 139 Tex.Cr.R. 134, 138 S.W.2d 1081; Bickerstaff v. State, 139 Tex.Cr.R. 69, 139 S.W.2d 110; Peters v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 146, 151 S.W.2d 592.

It appears by a proper bill of exceptions that the State was allowed to introduce before the jury, and read to them, the affidavit for search warrant, as well as the warrant itself, all over appellant’s objections. We think the trial court committed error in allowing these two documents to be read in evidence before the jury. See Rockholt v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 479, 126 S.W.2d 488; Seay v. State, 134 Tex.Cr.R. 252, 115 S.W.2d 419; Hall v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 320, 125 S.W.2d 293, and authorities there cited.

On account of the above error the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded.
|                                                                        
|------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                          
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                    
|View History:                                                           
|                                                                        
|Alabama (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                        
|                                                                        
|Alabama (with State Offshore) Shale Proved Reserves (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 1      | 2      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023