alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

 
 

Exhibit 4.4    
    


 
 

[FORM OF STOCK CERTIFICATE FOR CLASS A COMMON STOCK]    
    


INCORPORATED
UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 



	NUMBER	 	SHARES




OTELCO INC.  



	 	 	Total Authorized Issue

20,000,000 Shares $0.01 Par Value

Class A Common Stock	 	See Reverse for

Certain Definitions
	 	 	 	 	 
	
 This is to certify that	 	is the owner of

fully paid and





non-assessable
shares of the above Corporation transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder thereof in person or by a duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this
Certificate properly endorsed. 


Witness,
the seal of the Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized officers. 


Dated



OTELCO INC.

CORPORATE SEAL  



	 
 SIGNATURE	 	 
 SIGNATURE









 

        The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to
applicable laws or regulations: 



	TEN COM	—	as tenants in common	 	UNIF GIFT MIN ACT—	                          	Custodian	                             
	TEN ENT	—	as tenants by the entireties	 	 	(Cust)	 	(Minor)
	JT TEN	—	as joint tenants with right of survivorship

and not as tenants in common	 	under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act	                                        
     

(State)
	 	 	Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the list.	 	 	 





	 	 	PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER

IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE

	For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and transfers unto	 	 
	 

	PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS OF ASSIGNEE	 	 





	 

	 
	Shares





	represented by the within Certificate, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints	 	 






	 
	 
	 	Attorney to transfer the said
	Shares on the books of the within named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.





	Dated,	 
	 	 
	 	In the presence of	 	 






NOTICE:    The
signature to this assignment must correspond with the name as written upon the face of the certificate in every particular without alteration or enlargement or any change
whatever. 


2











QuickLinks



Exhibit 4.4


[FORM OF STOCK CERTIFICATE FOR CLASS A COMMON STOCK]
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

July 30, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133679 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133679 

 COA: 276072 

Ingham CC: 05-000604-FC

DEXTER WALLACE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 16, 2007 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0723 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

July 30, 2007 

 Clerk
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Zones, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the period ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Firoz H. Lalji, Chairman and
Chief Executive 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and





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








Date:
August 11, 2008








/S/   FIROZ
      H LALJIFiroz
      H. LaljiChairman
      and Chief Executive Officer
Appeal Dismissed and Opinion Filed September26, 2012

In The 

## Qiuttrt nf rah ifth 1iitrirt tif 

## xaa at 1at1a No. 05-12-00691-CR
KATHRYN BARNETT, Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 194th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F11-61769-M 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before ChiefJustice Wright and Justices Bridges and Myers Appellanthas filed amotion to dismiss the appeal. Appellant’s counsel has approvedthe motion. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS thatthe appeal be DISMISSED and this decisionbe certifiedbelow forobservance. See TEx. R. App. P. 42.2(a). PER CURIAM Do Not Publish TEx. R. App. P. 47 120691F.U05
EXHIBIT 10(k)

Contract No:	34150

Amendment No:	06

AMENDMENT

Date:	Mar 09, 2000

"Transporter":	ANR PIPELINE COMPANY

"Shipper":	NORTH SHORE GAS COMPANY

 

Effective Apr 01, 2000, Shipper and Transporter have agreed to amend FSS Contract No. 34150 dated Sep 21, 1994 ("Agreement") as follows:

Extend the term of this Agreement to March 31, 2003. An updated Contract Quantity Exhibit reflecting this change is attached.

- Revise Shipper's contract quantities (MSQ, BMDIQ, and BMDWQ) to reflect an MDWQ increase under this Agreement and to also incorporate Transporter's Use % (fuel matrix) revisions pursuant to Transporter's Annual Redetermination Filing effective April1, 2000. An updated Contract Quantity Exhibit reflecting these changes is attached.
- Restate Article 8 - Further Agreement as follows:

8.A	For the period April 1, 2000 through March 31, 2003, the rates for storage service up to the MSQ and MDWQ under this Agreement shall be a Deliverability Rate of $2.45 and a Capacity Rate of $0.4000. In addition, Shipper will be charged theMinimum Commodity Rate for injection and withdrawals and Transporter's Use ("Fuel") in accordance with Transporter's FERC Gas Tariff which is subject to change from time to time.

8.B	If, for any reason, Transporter is prohibited from charging and/or collecting the revenues generated under this Agreement on the basis of the reservation and commodity rates set forth in Paragraph 8(A) above, then Transporter shall have theright to adjust (prospectively only) such reservation and/or commodity rates so as to enable Transporter to charge and collect the same level of revenues Transporter would have received as previously agreed between Transporter and Shipper.

8.C	From time to time, dependent upon Transporter's Use percents, the MSQ under this Agreement and MDQ's under ETS Agreement Nos. 3200, 102498 and 104682, will be adjusted to allow Shipper to deliver and Store sufficient fuel quantities toeffectuate a 50-day storage withdrawal quantity of 126,106 dth at the specified Delivery Points with no change in the total charges under these services.

 

All other terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20
- 6173

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DASHAWN RAQUAN HUNT , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Kenneth D. Bell, District Judge . ( 5:14

- cr - 00067

- KDB

- DCK

- 1 ; 5:17

- cv 00040

- KDB )

Submitted : April 14, 2020 Decided: April 17, 2020

Before WILKINSON , QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Dashawn Raquan Hunt , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dashawn Raquan Hunt seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relie f on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2018).
A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2018). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satis fies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis , 137 S. Ct. 759, 773

- 74 (2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler , 565 U.S. 134, 140

- 41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hunt has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the fac ts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12** 

**- 2097** 

OMBA ARSENE ONEMA

,

Petitioner

,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General

,

Respondent

.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals.

Submitted : March 26, 2013 Decided: April 2, 2013

Before DAVIS, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by un published per curiam opinion

.

Sam H. Hasan, HASAN LAW GROUP, Falls Church, Virginia, for
Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Linda S. Wernery, Assistant Director, Gerald

M. Alexander , Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are no t binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Omba Arsene Onema, a native and citizen of the

Democratic Republic of the Congo (“DRC”), petitions for review

of an order of the Board of Immigrati on Appeals (“Board”)

denying his motion to reopen immigra tion proceedings . We have

reviewed the record and the Board’s order and find no abuse of

discretion

. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a), (c) (2012). Accordingly,

we deny the petition for review substantially * for the reasons

stated by the Board. In re: Onema (B. I.A. Aug. 9 , 2012). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED

* Although the Board erroneously relied on our decision in Afanwi v. Mukasey , 526 F.3d 788 (4th Cir. 2008), vacated , 130 S.

Ct. 350 (2009), we nonetheless find no abuse of discretion in its alternate finding that Onema was not entitled to equitable tolling on the ground that he failed to demonstrate that he acted with due diligence.
OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS **AUSTIN**

Honorable WaryInRail Fire fnmzranor cod88ioner Board of Insurance CommIssIonerr / ~.'~I: Austin,Texas Dear Sir: '~E8o&gq,.iew~~aa against churoheo and **ihyday ~?I6001** bull&in&& owl&& r&eipt **0f your**  letter **0r** aa to whethar as ex offloio Sta.%aFir0

the Tome Fire

\ *Tba q$etlon hae arieon whether ohurohas **and** &nd&&ohaol Eduoatlonal Bulldlnge are eubjsot to tb& prmlelons **or** theas artloler. LTour opinion Ie requested a8to whether these ar$ialar are applicable to euoh bulldloSs.R Title 03 of' the Ravleod Clvll Statutes of Texas, coinpored of Article8 '3955-3972,. both lnoluslve, Ir knowna8 the Biro Esoaps Lew. All euahsrtlolea are taken from HouseBill $lg;, Aots, 1923, Thirty-Eighth Lsgltiture, Chaptar 170, Pge

.

## . 773

Honorable 

### MarvinHall,age 2

Article 3956 thereof reads:

“For each hospital, seminary, oollege, academy, sohool house, dormitory, hotel, lodging house, agartmsnt house, rooming house, boarding house, house for the aocomodation of transient **guests,** lodge hall, theatre, gubllo plaoe of **amusement,** or hall or plaoe used for public gatherings, having a lot area in exoeaa of **five** thousand square feet, there shall be provided one additional adequate flrt, ercape for eaoh five thoumendsquare feet of such exoea~ or fraotlon thereof If suoh fraction exoeeds two thousand aquare feet.* Article 3971 of the sametitle provldee that the state Fire &r8hal or other offloerrs namedthsreln shall lnapclot all fire esoapea, extensions 

### andaddltlonrto 

### tireQBcape8aonstruetsd under the provisions of such law.

Since ohurohee and SundaySchool buildings are not speolflcally 

### mentionedin the not, **your** question la reoelred into the proposition of whether or not ohurohsa andSunday 

### SchoolBulldlllga

oonstltute e *.
. . hall or plaoe used 

### for publlo gatherings.
. iW within the purview of Artlole 3956, **mpra .**  It is a matter of oommonknowledge that the pub110 generally is invited and enocureged to attend ohuroh and SundaySchool irrsspeotlra of membership ‘In the particular ohurch. Areading of iihecaption of the orlglml act manl

### featse legislative desire for the ereotlon and proper malntenance of fire ssoapes adequate to properly protect human lips in all buildings of certain height and elze. Areading of that portion thereof, nowknown as Arti 3936, sup=, **leads** us to the oonalualon that they were especially ooncerned with the safety of persons assembled at public gatherings in buildings of the dimensions presorlbed in Artiale 3956, suFa.

It In our opinion that ohurohes andSundaySohool eduoetlonal buildlugs era balls or places used for pub110

## 774

Honorable Mervin Hell, Page 3 gatherings within the purvir+wof A~rtlole 3956, supra and that you are charged by lawwith the enforoement of ihe provisions of Title 63, supra. Yours very truly ATXJRWEY

GENEIL4L

OFTEXAS Lloyd Armstrong Asdstant LA:AW

VEDOC';25, 1940 I ATTORNEY

GENERAL

OPTms
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2708 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2708

 To direct the Director of National Intelligence to conduct a study on 
                 cyber attack standards of measurement.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 2015

 Mr. Wilson of South Carolina introduced the following bill; which was 
  referred to the Select Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select)

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To direct the Director of National Intelligence to conduct a study on 
                 cyber attack standards of measurement.

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

SECTION 1. CYBER ATTACK STANDARDS OF MEASUREMENT STUDY.

    (a) Study Required.--The Director of National Intelligence, in 
consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Director of 
the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Secretary of Defense, 
shall carry out a study to determine appropriate standards that--
            (1) can be used to measure the damage of cyber incidents 
        for the purposes of determining the response to such incidents; 
        and
            (2) include a method for quantifying the damage caused to 
        affected computers, systems, and devices.
    (b) Reports to Congress.--
            (1) Preliminary findings.--Not later than 180 days after 
        the date of the enactment of this Act, the Director of National 
        Intelligence shall provide to the Committee on Armed Services, 
        the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 
        and the Select Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the 
        Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland 
        Security, and the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of 
        the House of Representatives the initial findings of the study 
        required under subsection (a).
            (2) Report.--Not later than 360 days after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, the Director of National Intelligence 
        shall submit to the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee 
        on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and the Select 
        Committee on Intelligence of the Senate and the Committee on 
        Armed Services, the Committee on Homeland Security, and the 
        Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence of the House of 
        Representatives a report containing the complete findings of 
        such study.
            (3) Form of report.--The report required by paragraph (2) 
        shall be submitted in unclassified form, but may contain a 
        classified annex.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2022312EN.01000101.xml

| 17.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 312/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 312/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10835 – ALLIANZ / DALMORE / AMBER / TIDEWAY)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 312/01)

On 10 August 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10835. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10835. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
# C_2022297EN.01000101.xml

| 4.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/1

---

RECOMMENDATION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 27 July 2022

to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank

(ECB/2022/27)

(2022/C 297/01)

THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank, and in particular Article 27.1 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The accounts of the European Central Bank (ECB) and the national central banks of the Member States whose currency is the euro are audited by independent external auditors recommended by the ECB’s Governing Council and approved by the Council of the European Union.

| (2) | In 2018, De Nederlandsche Bank selected KPMG Accountants N.V. as its external auditors for the financial years 2019 to 2022, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial year 2025 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In 2018, De Nederlandsche Bank selected KPMG Accountants N.V. as its external auditors for the financial years 2019 to 2022, with the option to extend the mandate to the financial year 2025 (1).

| (3) | The mandate of De Nederlandsche Bank’s current external auditors, KPMG Accountants N.V., will end after the audit for the financial year 2022. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2023. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The mandate of De Nederlandsche Bank’s current external auditors, KPMG Accountants N.V., will end after the audit for the financial year 2022. It is therefore necessary to appoint external auditors from the financial year 2023.

| (4) | De Nederlandsche Bank intends to extend the mandate of KPMG Accountants N.V. to the financial year 2025. This extension is possible in accordance with the contractual arrangements between De Nederlandsche Bank and KPMG Accountants N.V., |
| --- | --- |

(4)

De Nederlandsche Bank intends to extend the mandate of KPMG Accountants N.V. to the financial year 2025. This extension is possible in accordance with the contractual arrangements between De Nederlandsche Bank and KPMG Accountants N.V.,

HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that KPMG Accountants N.V. should be appointed as the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank for the financial years 2023 to 2025.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 27 July 2022.

The President of the ECB

Christine LAGARDE

---

(1)  Recommendation ECB/2018/25 of the European Central Bank of 19 October 2018 to the Council of the European Union on the external auditors of De Nederlandsche Bank (OJ C 394, 30.10.2018, p. 1).

1

---
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JEFFERY TODD CRYSTAL, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D15-3281

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed October 19, 2016. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas

County; Frank Quesada, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Carol J. Y. Wilson, Assistant Public 

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General,

Tallahassee, and Bilal A. Faruqui, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, 

for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed without prejudice to any right Crystal may have to file a motion for 

postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(b) regarding 

whether his plea was voluntary. 
- 2 -

SILBERMAN, LaROSE, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.