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

​
September 5, 2021 
Jessica Bast
VIA EMAIL 
Dear Jessica,
I am very pleased to offer you the opportunity of Chief Financial Officer of General Cannabis Corp. The following information outlines the terms of the employment offer: 
Start Date:  September 6, 2021
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Reporting to: Adam Hershey, Interim CEO
Base Salary: $165,000 annually, to be paid bi-weekly (unchanged from current salary)
Bonus Potential: 10% guaranteed minimum ($16,500), additional at the discretion of the Board
Stock Options: 
		●	All current options vest immediately; however, lock up until the one-year anniversary of the date hereof (as well as subject to customary black-out periods)

		●	Exercise price to be closing price as of 9-3; except 4/22/2020 tranche of 34,880 to remain with $0.39 exercise price

		●	Expiration of all options to be the later of (i) December 31, 2024 or (ii) existing term

		●	Participation in Company stock option plan

Work Schedule:  Flexible as to physical office; must be available to come to office when needed
Location: Denver
Benefits: 

		●	Medical, dental, vision insurance (same as current)

		●	Short-term disability and life insurance 

		●	401K Plan (same as current)

		●	Paid time off per company policy 


This letter does not constitute a guarantee or contract of employment, and employment is at-will. Accordingly, subject to the provisions described herein, you or the Company may terminate employment for any or no reason. Employment continues to be subject to our policies, procedures, and handbook, subject to revisions from time to time. 
Congratulations and we look forward to continuing to work with you in your new role!

​
	​


	​



	​
	​



​



​
Sincerely, 
​
Adam Hershey
Interim CEO, General Cannabis Corp 
Agreed and Accepted:
​
_____________________________ 
Jessica Bast

​
	​


	​



	​
	​



​
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE

.

IN THE 

## A RIZONA 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEALS

D IVISION O NE

STATE OF ARIZONA , Respondent ,

v.
SAMUEL YAZZIE WEBB , Petitioner

. No. 1 CA

- CR 18

- 0684 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2009

- 157140

- 001 The Honorable Joseph C. Kreamer , Judge REVIEW GRANTED; RELI EF DENIED

COUNSEL Maricopa County Attorney's Office, Phoenix By Diane Meloche Counsel for Respondent

Samuel Yazzie Webb , Tucson Petitioner

MEMORANDUM DECISION Presiding Judge Diane M. Johnsen, Judge Michael J. Brown and Judge Jennifer M. Perkins delivered the decision of the Court. FILED 1-17-2019STATE v. WEBB Decision of the Court

2 PER CURIAM : ¶1 Petitioner Samuel Yazzie Webb seeks review of the superior court's order denying his petition for post

- conviction relief, filed pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is petitioner's first petition. ¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will not disturb a superior court's ruling on a petition for post

- conviction relief. State v. Gutierrez , 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is petitioner's burden to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition for post

- conviction relief. See State v. Poblete , 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review). ¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior court's order denying the petition for post

- conviction relief, and the petition for review. Petitioner has not es tablished an abuse of discretion. ¶4 For the foregoing reasons, we grant review but deny relief.
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 this Amendment No. 1 to  the Annual Report of Martin Midstream Partners L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (the “Partnership”), on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Robert D. Bondurant, Chief Financial Officer of Martin Midstream GP LLC, the general partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 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 the Partnership.








/s/ Robert D. BondurantRobert D. Bondurant,Chief Financial Officerof Martin Midstream GP LLC,General Partner of Martin Midstream Partners L.P.March 28, 2013





*A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
3M Environmental, Health and 3M Center. Building 0224-05-W-03 Safety Operations St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 

## 33o~~) a

October 28. 2010 Federal Express Director . Chemical Control Division (7405M) Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) Room4146 EPA East U .S. Environmental Protection Agency 1201 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 Attention: Docket No. OPPT 2004-0112

PFOA Site-Related Environmental Assessment Program Subject: Status Report Pursuant to the Memorandumof Understanding between

and 3M Company and Dyneon LLCdated October 2004 Dear Sir or Madam, On November 19, 2009, U .S. EPA approved the Phase 3 Work Plan under the subject Memorandumof Understanding (MOU) . Accordingly, and per the MOU, 3M and Dyneon have resumed the submittal ofquarterly status reports. Enclosed for your information and records are two paper copies of theJuly i to September 30, 2010 report (one includes a copy of the raw data) and one electronic version that has been copied to a CD(also including the raw data) . Two paper copies of the report (one with a copy of the raw data) and a CD(also including the raw

data) have also been sent to the referenced docket as noted in the cc list below

. S75

If there are any questions or comments concerning this matter, please contact me at 65 I 737-3570. Sincerely, .--r ' Gary Hohenstein Ma ager, Environmental & Regulatory Affairs Environmental, Health and Safety Operations 3M - Building 224-5W-03 St. Paul, MN 55144 651 737-3570 ~,Zl~ltJhtil`itelll`tl !i'tT71ITl .C(.>ilZ CON!-PJ1VS NO

## CBI
* Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular

cases on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes

needless expense on the public and burdens on the legal

profession." Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-10397 

Conference Calendar

__________________

DEBRA LYNN LEBOURNEY PATMORE,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

BEN WHITEMAN, JR., Sheriff;

DAVIS, Sergeant, Jail Administrator;

ALICE YOUNGBLOOD, Sergeant, Parker

County, TX

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth

USDC No. 4:94CV00531

- - - - - - - - - -

(October 18, 1995)

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and REAVLEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Debra Lynn Lebourney Patmore, a former inmate of the Parker

County Jail, filed a pro se and in forma pauperis (IFP) civil

rights complaint alleging the denial of medical care. The

district court dismissed the complaint without prejudice pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d). 
No. 95-10397

-2-

 Patmore filed in the district court a motion requesting

leave to appeal out-of-time. She also filed a notice of appeal

in this court. This court remanded the case to the district

court for a determination whether Patmore had deposited her

notice of appeal in the prison system on or before the last day

for filing. This court also directed the district court to make

a final ruling on Patmore's motion for leave to appeal out-oftime. 

 The district court's subsequent determination that Patmore's

notice of appeal was not timely filed, and its denial of

Patmore's motion for leave to appeal out-of-time, are the subject

of the instant appeal. However, Patmore neither argues nor

refers to the issues before this court in her appellate brief. 

Rather, Patmore re-argues the merits of her civil rights

complaint, impliedly suggesting that the district court erred by

dismissing the complaint. Patmore's appeal of the district

court's dismissal of her complaint was dismissed for failure to

file a brief. 

 Although we liberally construe briefs of pro se litigants

and apply less stringent standards to parties proceeding pro se

than to parties represented by counsel, pro se parties must brief

the issues and reasonably comply with Fed. R. App. P. 28(a). 

Grant v. Cuellar, 59 F.3d 523, 524 (5th Cir. 1995). Issues not

briefed are deemed abandoned. Evans v. City of Marlin, Tex., 986

F.2d 104, 106 n.1 (5th Cir. 1993). Because Patmore does not

brief the only issues before the court, they are deemed abandoned
No. 95-10397

-3-

and we will not address them. See id. The appeal is DISMISSED.

See Grant, 59 F.3d at 525; 5th Cir. R. 42.3.2.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

CHARLES EDWARD FLAHERTY
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee.

No. 4D2024

- 0401

[ September 18, 2024 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Andrew L

. Siegel , Judge; L.T. Case No. 19

- 011062

- CF

10A

.

Antony P. Ryan, Regional Counsel, and Paul O’Neil, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Zi Jin Peter Chan, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for appellee.

ON CONFESSION OF ERROR

P ER C URIAM

.

Appellant, Charles Edward Flaherty, appeals the revocation of his probation and subsequent sentencing. Appellant contends the trial court erred because the evidence was insufficient to identify Appellant as the person who committed the crimes alleged in the violation of probation

affidavit. The State agrees and confesses error. After reviewing the record, we agree the trial court erred. We reverse the order revoking probation and the sentence imposed thereafter, and remand the case for the trial

court t o vacate those orders and to dismiss the violation proceeding. On remand, the State may attempt to prove a violation based on the same

circumstances upon the filing of a new violation of probation affidavit

, if the probationary period has not expired. See Scott v. State , 937 So. 2d 746, 749 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Boyd v. State , 1 So. 3d 1186, 1188 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009).2 Reversed

.

K LINGENSMITH

, C.J., D AMOORGIAN and C ONNER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Hi Nick,

Thanks for the pointer to the Region 5 website. It looks like EPA issued a rule on June 28, 1989 that established the FESOP criteria (five total) for limited criteria po llutants as part of the SIP (54 FR 27274). In a No vember 3, 1993 memo titled “Approaches to Creating Federally Enfor ceable Emissions Limits,” (Seitz memo – you can fin d this on the web) EPA explained this could be extended to federa lly enforceable limits for HAP emissions if the pro gram were approved pursuant to CAA section 112(l). In a 1995 DFR, EPA approved Indiana’s FESOP program (60 FR 4 3008) and in that rule, explained the fifth criterion was “Th e permits are issued subject to public participatio n.” They go on to say that “This means that the State agrees, as a pa rt of its program, to provide USEPA and the public with timely notice of the proposed issuance of such permits, an d to provide USEPA, on a timely basis, with a copy of each proposed (or draft) and final permit intended to be federally enforceable.”

My follow-up questions are:

- How does this differ from the public participation requirement of Title V?

- Does EPA keep a list or record of the states with F ESOP programs? Does EPA have a list of the FR cita tions for those FESOP programs? Can you point me to a person at EPA (non-Regions) with background on this issue ?

- Does EPA have any information on the burden to stat es to process a Title V permit? What about a FESOP ?

Thanks, Cortney 

### FESOP

Higgins, Cortney

to: Nick Parsons 10/04/2012 04:45 PM Cc: Penny Lassiter, Paul Versace, JohnB Chamberlin Hide Details From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.g ov>

To: Nick Parsons/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: Penny Lassiter/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, Paul Versace/D C/USEPA/US@EPA, JohnB Chamberlin/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

History: This message has been replied to. 

### Page 1 of 1

10/9/2012 file://C:\Documents and Settings\nparsons\Local Set tings\Temp\notes87944B\~web1950.h

...
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5618 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5618

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain work footwear for 
                                 women.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 8, 2012

 Ms. Jenkins introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on certain work footwear for 
                                 women.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN WORK FOOTWEAR FOR WOMEN.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.22.47 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain work footwear for 
women) is amended by striking the date in the effective period column 
and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect 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>
```
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.                  

###### Federal Maritime Commission

Notice is hereby given that the following applicant has filed with the Federal Maritime Commission an application for a license as a Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder—Ocean Transportation Intermediary pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 as amended (46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 515). 

Persons knowing of any reason why the following applicant should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of Transportation Intermediaries, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, D.C. 20573. 

## Non-Vessel Operating Common Carrier and Ocean Freight Forwarder Transportation Intermediary Applicants 

Helayel Inc., 235 West 37th Street, #1502, New York, NY 10001, Officer: Daniella Helayel, President (Qualifying Individual). 

Dated: October 6, 2000.

Bryant L. VanBrakle,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 00-26232 Filed 10-11-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 198 (Thursday, October 12, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26231]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties can 
review or obtain copies of agreements at the Washington, DC offices of 
the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Room 940. Interested 
parties may submit comments on an agreement to the Secretary, Federal 
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days of the date 
this notice appears in the Federal Register.

    Agreement No.: 011728.
    Title: Maersk Sealand/APL Mediterranean Slot Charter Agreement
    Parties:

     A.P. Moller-Maersk Sealand (``MSL'')
    APL Co. Pte. Ltd. and American President Lines, Ltd. (collectively, 
``APL'')

    Synopsis: The proposed agreement authorizes MSL to charter slots to 
APL in the trade between U.S. East and Gulf Coasts ports and ports in 
the Mediterranean, including ports in Spain, Malta, and Italy.

    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.

    Dated: October 6, 2000.
Bryant L. VanBrakle,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26231 Filed 10-11-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY, )

GILBERTO HINOJOSA, Chair of the )

Texas Democratic Party, JOSEPH DANIEL )

CASCINO, SHANDA MARIE SANSING, )

and BRENDA LI GARCIA, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

)

and )

)

LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN )

AMERICAN CITIZENS (LULAC), and )

TEXAS LEAGUE OF UNITED LATIN )

AMERICAN CITIZENS, )

)

Plaintiff-Intervenors, )

)

V. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. SA-20-CA-438-FB

)

RUTH HUGHS, Texas Secretary of State; )

DANA DEBEAUVOIR, Travis County )

Clerk; and JACQUELYN F. CALLANEN, )

Bexar County Elections Administrator, )

)

 Defendants. )

ORDER DISMISSING GOVERNOR GREG ABBOTT AND TEXAS ATTORNEY

GENERAL KEN PAXTON AS PARTY-DEFENDANTS IN THIS CASE

Before the Court is the status of Greg Abbott, Governor of the State of Texas, and Ken Paxton,

Texas AttorneyGeneral, as party-defendants in the above styled and numbered cause. The Fifth Circuit

Court of Appeals held on interlocutory appeal that the Governor and Texas Attorney General are

entitled to sovereign immunity in this case. Texas Democratic Party v. Abbott, 978 F.3d 168, 180-81

(5th Cir. 2020), cert. denied, 141 S. Ct. 1124 (2021). On remand, plaintiffs and plaintiffs-intervenors

filed amended complaints which do not name Governor Abbot or Texas Attorney General Paxton as

Case 5:20-cv-00438-FB Document 161 Filed 07/02/21 Page 1 of 2
defendants. The Court is therefore of the opinion that Governor Greg Abbott and Texas Attorney

General Ken Paxton should be dismissed as party-defendants in the above-styled and numbered cause. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Greg Abbott, Governor of the State of Texas, and Ken

Paxton, Texas AttorneyGeneral are DISMISSED as party-defendants in the above styled and numbered

cause. Plaintiffs’ and Plaintiffs-Intervenors’ claims against Ruth Hughs, Texas Secretaryof State, Dana

Debeauvoir, Travis County Clerk, and Jacquelyn F. Callanen, Bexar County Elections Administrator,

remain pending for disposition.

It is so ORDERED.

SIGNED this 2nd day of July, 2021.

 _________________________________________________

 FRED BIERY

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2

Case 5:20-cv-00438-FB Document 161 Filed 07/02/21 Page 2 of 2
##### 



(PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LOGO) PricewaterhouseCooper LLP
214 N, Tryon Street
Ste 3600
Charlotte NC 28202
Telephone (704) 344 7500
Facsimile (704) 344 4100
 Report of Independent
Accountants To the Board of Directors and Shareholder 
of Bank of America, N.A. We have examined managements assertion about compliance by the
mortgage division of Bank of America, N.A. (the Company), an
operating division of Bank of America, N.A., with the minimum
servicing standards identified in the Mortgage Bankers
Association of Americas Uniform Single Attestation Program for
Mortgage Bankers(USAP) as of and for the year ended December
31, 2003 included in the accompanying management assertion (see
Exhibit 1). Management is responsible for the Companys
compliance with those minimum servicing standards. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assertion about the Companys compliance based on our
examination. Our examination was made in accordance with standards
established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test
basis, evidence about the Companys compliance with the minimum
servicing standards and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our
examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Companys compliance with the minimum servicing standards. In our opinion, managements assertion that the Company
complied with the aforementioned minimum servicing standards as
of and for the year ended December 31, 2003 is fairly stated,
in all material respects. (PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP) March 2, 2004




---



##### 



Exhibit I (BANK OF AMERICA LOGO) Managements Assertion Concerning Compliance
with USAP Minimum Servicing Standards March 2, 2004 As of and for the year ended December 31,
2003, the Mortgage division of Bank of
America, N.A. (the Company), has complied in
all material respects with the minimum
servicing standards set forth in the Mortgage
Bankers Association of Americas Uniform
Single Attestation Program for Mortgage
Bankers(USAP). As of and for this same period, the Company
had in effect a fidelity bond and errors and
omissions policy in the amounts of $340,000,000 and $270,000,000, respectively. /s/ Kevin M. Shannon

Kevin M. Shannon 
President 
Consumer Real Estate 
Bank of America, N.A.
    
    /s/ H. Randall Chestnut

H. Randall Chestnut
Senior Vice President
Bank of America, N.A./s/ Aashish Kamat

Aashish Kamat
Senior Vice President and 
Managing Director 
Bank of America, N.A.
    
    /s/ Gary K. Bettin

Gary K. Bettin 
Senior Vice President and
National Servicing Executive
Bank of America, N.A./s/ J. Mark Hanson

J. Mark Hanson
Senior Vice President
Bank of America, N.A.(USA LOGO)