alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.22

                               ENDORSEMENT NO. 2

                         Attached to and made a part of
                             AUTOMOBILE QUOTA SHARE
                        AGREEMENT OF REINSURANCE NO. 8937
                                     between
                           SAFE AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY
                     (herein referred to as the "Company")
                                       and
                        GENERAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION
                    (herein referred to as the "Reinsurer")

IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the $40,000,000 cap for the first Agreement Year
here-under, as set forth in the second paragraph of ARTICLE V - LIABILITY OF THE
REINSURER, is amended to $50,000,000.

IT IS FURTHER AGREED that the cap for the second Agreement Year hereunder, as
set forth in the second paragraph of said ARTICLE V, is $50,000,000.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed
in duplicate,

this 29th day of December, 2002,

                                       SAFE AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY

                                       /s/ ARI DESHE, CEO
                                       ------------------
Attest:_______________

and this_______day of__________,200__.

                                       GENERAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION

                                       /s/ Jon Schriber
                                       ------------------
                                         Vice President

Attest: /s/ William J. Brassington
        --------------------------

                        GENERAL REINSURANCE CORPORATION
#### POWELL v. STATE.

No. 17707.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 30, 1935.

M. C. Culbertson, of Vernon, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is driving an automobile on a public street of a city while intoxicated; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for one year.

While driving his automobile on a public street in the city of Vernon, appellant collided with another car. Witnesses for the state testified that appellant was intoxicated. Appellant denied that he had been drinking intoxicating liquor and declared that he was under the influence of medicine which he had been taking for an illness. His theory was given support in the testimony of other witnesses.

Bills of exception 1 and 2 relate to appellant’s objections to testimony elicited from him on cross-examination. Said bills show that appellant was required to testify to the fact that in 1930 he was indicted for a felony, and in 1934 convicted of an offense of the same grade. This testimony was admissible for the purpose of impeaching appellant.

Bill of exception No. 3 recites that at the time of the trial appellant excepted to a certain portion of the court’s charge. The bill fails to show that appellant timely excepted in writing, as required by the statute (Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. art. 2237).

The judgment is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the court.
# C_2023004EN.01000301.xml

| 6.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10901 – OAKTREE / ARES / VECTOR / NEOVIA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 4/03)

On 24 October 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 32022M10901. 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 32022M10901. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
# Materials Not Included in **Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket**

Docket Number: FAA- 2011 - 0382 Directorate Identifier: 2010NM063AD

767 -23 -0159, R1 --- 12/5/02 767 -23 -0159 --- 7/25/02 767 -31 -0091 IN 01 --- 5/23/07 767 -31 -0091, R3 --- 4/27/00 767 -31 -0091, R2 --- 2/24/00 767 -31 -0091, R1 --- 2/4/99 767 -31 -0091 --- 7/23/98 767 -31 -0098, R1 --- 2/4/99 767 -31 -0098 --- 8/27/98 767 -31 -0099, R2 --- 6/17/99 767 -31 -0099, R1 --- 2/4/99 767 -31 -0099 --- 8/6/98 767 -31 -0100, R1 --- 2/4/99 767 -31 -0100 --- 8/20/98 767 -31 -0114 --- 3/18/99

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the Supplemental AD Docket



### MA **Y BE VIEWED AT:** Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate Rules Docket 1601 Lind Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98057 425.227.1221 **DURING THE HOURS OF:** 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Form Date: 03/05/2008
#### SIMS v. STATE.

No. 19934.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 19, 1938.

J. W. McCullough, of McKinney, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

Conviction for a misdemeanor, punishment being assessed at a fine of $100.

The judgment of the trial court was affirmed by this court on the 15th of June, 1938. On the 29th of June, 1938, which was after this court had adjourned for the term, appellant filed a motion for rehearing: While the motion fdr rehearing was pending, on the 10th day of October, 1938, he filed his application, duly verified by his affidavit, requesting that the appeal be dismissed.

The opinion of affirmance is withdrawn and the appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court,
# C_2022433EN.01001301.xml

| 15.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/13

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10845 – HG / WCAS / WARBURG PINCUS / NORSTELLA)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 433/03)

On 10 October 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 32022M10845. 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 32022M10845. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

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

---
# C_2022293EN.01001701.xml

| 1.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 293/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 293/17

---

Publication of an application for the modification of a traditional term in the wine sector pursuant to Articles 28(3) and 34 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 supplementing Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards applications for protection of designations of origin, geographical indications and traditional terms in the wine sector, the objection procedure, restrictions of use, amendments to product specifications, cancellation of protection, and labelling and presentation

‘Vin de paille’

(2022/C 293/10)

This publication confers the right to object to the application in accordance with Articles 22(1) and 27(1) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/34 (1). Statements of objection must reach the Commission within two months from the date of this publication.

Modification request concerning the traditional term

‘Vin de paille’

Date of receipt: 8 July 2019

Number of pages (including this page): 2

Language of request for modification: French

Dossier No: Ares(2019)4340945

Traditional term for which the modification is requested: Vin de paille

| Applicant: Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Directorate-General for the Economic and Environmental Performance of Enterprises – France |
| --- |
| Full address (street number and name, town/city and postal code, country): |
| 3 rue Barbet de Jouy |
| 75349 Paris SP |
| FRANCE |

Applicant: Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Directorate-General for the Economic and Environmental Performance of Enterprises – France

Full address (street number and name, town/city and postal code, country):

3 rue Barbet de Jouy

75349 Paris SP

FRANCE

Nationality: French

Telephone, fax, Email:

Tel. +33 149554624

Email: liste-cdc-vin-aop-DGPAAT@agriculture.gouv.fr

Description of the modification: List of protected designations of origin or geographical indications concerned: PDOs ‘Arbois’, ‘Côtes du Jura’, ‘L’Etoile’, ‘Hermitage’, ‘Corrèze’.

Explanation of grounds for modification: France protected the ‘Corrèze’ designation of origin by Order of 28 September 2017. A request to register this name was sent to the Commission on 20 December 2017 with reference PDO-FR-02407. The specification for this new designation of origin authorises the use of the term ‘Vin de paille’ and lays down the conditions for its use, in accordance with the definition of the French traditional term ‘Vin de paille’ protected at EU level.

Name of signatory: Ministry of Agriculture and Food

---

(1)  OJ L 9, 11.1.2019, p. 46.

---
Order entered June 16, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00750-CR

No. 05-20-00751-CR

No. 05-20-00752-CR

No. 05-20-00753-CR

No. 05-20-00754-CR

JASON JACOB OSIFO, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause Nos. 296-81128-2020, 296-81129-2020, 296-81394-2016, 

296-82063-2017 & 296-82964-2015

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s June 14, 2021 third motion for an extension 

of time to file his brief. We GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s brief due 

by July 14, 2021. If the brief is not filed by July 14, 2021, the Court may abate 

these appeals for a hearing under rule 38.8. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(b).

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
Exhibit 13.2

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, I, Anabelle L. Chua,
Senior Vice President and Treasurer of Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, hereby certify, to my knowledge, that our annual report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2012 (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, our financial condition and results of operations.

March 27, 2013



/s/ Anabelle L. ChuaANABELLE L. CHUASenior Vice President and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)


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.
# CE2004065EN.01009001.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/90 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/90

---

(2004/C 65 E/102)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1760/03

by Mario Borghezio (NI) to the Commission

(27 May 2003)

Subject:   Turin to Lyons high-speed rail link: a priority for Europe

Subject:

The French Government has announced that work on the Turin to Lyons high-speed rail line section cannot begin before 2015.

It is essential to build this line not just for Piedmont, an important geo-economic area, but also in order to create an interconnected Europe-wide system of links between the northern and southern halves of the continent and to link northern Italy to eastern Europe.

Will not the Union stress again, in particular for the benefit of the French Government, that the Turin to Lyons section constitutes a priority where completion of Corridor V is concerned, as the Member of the Commission responsible for transport has repeatedly stated?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(17 July 2003)

(17 July 2003)

The French Government has not yet officially adopted a position on the Lyon-Turin project. The Ministry of Economic Affairs and Finance and the Ministry of Transport have carried out an audit at its request. This was followed by a debate in the National Assembly and the French Senate in May 2003. On the basis of the conclusions of the audit and the debate, the French Government will take a decision in the autumn on the priority it intends to give the project. Against this background, the Commission has emphasised on several occasions, in Parliament as well as to the French authorities, the major importance of the Lyon-Turin project in restoring the modal balance of traffic on a strategic route which will enable western and eastern Europe to be linked across the Alps and Italy. The support given takes the form of a significant financial contribution amounting to EUR 100 million for the period 2001-2006 — under the budget for the trans-European networks — for the studies programme.

In addition, the Lyon-Turin project is one of the projects covered by the scope of the Commission proposal to increase to 20 % the rate of co-funding for which cross-border rail projects crossing natural barriers could be eligible under the budget for the trans-European networks (TEN). The proposal — which was amended (1) following the vote on first reading in Parliament in July 2002 — is still languishing before the Council, and it is not possible to anticipate when the 20 % rate will become effective.

1

---

(1)  COM(2003) 38 final.

1

---
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q(the “Report”) of Petrocorp Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March31, 2009, James Fitzsimons, the President of the Company, hereby certifiespursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of the undersigned’s knowledgeand belief: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

Date: May 12, 2009

 

                                                                                    /s/ James Fitzsimons

                                                                                    James Fitzsimons, President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF TIB FINANCIAL CORP. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      19,875,437
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      14,867,053
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                            10,098,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 27,473,408
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      46,384,030
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        46,358,076
<LOANS>                                    257,531,407
<ALLOWANCE>                                  2,665,301
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             394,300,590
<DEPOSITS>                                 362,126,168
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,020,730
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          4,426,221
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       446,169
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,281,302
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             394,300,590
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              5,415,629
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            1,037,878
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               300,639
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             6,754,146
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           2,674,639
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           2,686,521
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        4,067,625
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  180,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              4,110,497
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,535,186
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     978,886
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                       47,047
<NET-INCOME>                                   931,839
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .21
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.71
<LOANS-NON>                                    374,689
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             2,517,234
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   33,558
<RECOVERIES>                                     1,625
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            2,665,301
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         2,665,301
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 24-0148

IN THE MATTER OF:

J.L.O.,

Respondent and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until October 2, 2024 to prepare, 

file, and serve the Appellant’s opening brief.

Electronically signed by:

Bowen Greenwood

Clerk of the Supreme Court

August 27 2024

08/27/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0148
# C_2022369EN.01000501.xml

| 27.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 369/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 369/5

---

Special report 20/2022:

‘EU action to combat illegal fishing – Control systems in place but weakened by uneven checks and sanctions by Member States’

(2022/C 369/04)

The European Court of Auditors has published its special report 20/2022: ‘EU action to combat illegal fishing – Control systems in place but weakened by uneven checks and sanctions by Member States’.

The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=61941

---
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
MARK LOUIS NEBEL; AMY LEE NEBEL,
Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v. LAWRENCE J. WARFIELD, Chapter 7 Trustee,
Defendant

- Appellee. No. 17

- 16350
D.C. No. 3:16

- cv - 08240

- GMS

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona G. Murray Snow, Chief Judge, Presiding Submitted February 4, 2019 ** Phoenix, Arizona Before: HAWKINS, M. SMITH, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges. Before filing a Chapter 7 petition, Mark and Amy Nebel paid the fees for their daughter to attend a n out

- of

- state ballet camp and bought airline tickets for her. The daughter a ttended the camp post

- filing. The bankruptcy court ordered the Nebe ls to

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

FEB 5 2019 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2

reim burse the estate the amount paid for the camp tuition and tickets

. The court also ordered turnover of 25% of any salary subsequently received by the Nebels from their employer for paid time off (“ PTO ”) accrued as of the date of filing

. The district

court affirmed the turnover order. We have jurisdiction of the Nebels’ appeal of the
district court order under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1) and affirm.
1. The Nebels do not dispute on appeal that the ir contractual interest s in the
tuition for the camp and airline tickets are property of the Chapter 7 estate

. T hey

argue instead that because the tuition payment and airline tickets are non

- refundable
and cannot be liquidated, they are of inconsequential value to the estate

. But , the
absence of a third

- party buyer f or an estate asset does not establish th at it has no
value

. See Nichols v. Birdsell , 491 F.3d 987, 990 (9th Cir. 2007) (involving non

transferable tax credits)

. Because the asset s at issue in this case were in fact used by
the Nebels post

- petition , the b ankruptcy court did not err in treating their value as the amount the Nebels paid for them

. See Stoumbos v. Kilimnik , 988 F.2d 949, 95 6

– 5 7 (9th Cir. 1993).
2. The Nebels do not dispute that the accrued PTO payments are assets of the

estate. See In re Reyerson , 739 F.2d 1423, 1425

– 426 (9th Cir. 1984) (holding that

pre - petition employment benefits are property of the estate) . Instead, they argue that the bankruptcy court should have ordered abandonment of these assets because their
maximum value was $2, 297 . But, th e Nebels did not seek abandonment below. Nor3

is abandonment mandated because collection of the assets might involve reopening
of the estate. The decision whether to order abandonment is left to the sound
discretion of the bankruptcy court. See Johnston v. Webster , 49 F.3d 538, 540 (9th Cir. 1995) . The court did not abuse that discretion here, as collection of the PTO, if received, would impose minimal costs on the estate.
AFFIRMED

.