alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.1



AMENDMENT TO WARRANT CERTIFICATE



This Amendment is made to the Warrant Certificate dated July 9, 2002 (the Warrant) issued by Advant-e Corporation (the Company) for the
benefit of ,
(Holder). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Warrant.



The Company and Holder agree that the Warrant shall be amended as follows:



1. Immediately following Section 1 of the Warrant, the following Section shall be added:



SECTION 1A. CASHLESS EXERCISE OF WARRANT. In addition to and without limiting the
rights of the Holder hereof under the terms hereof, at the Holders option this Warrant may be exercised in whole prior to its expiration by exchanging this Warrant for a number of shares of Common Stock having an aggregate market value on the
date of such exercise equal to the difference between (a) the closing price of the shares on the date of exercise, not to exceed the closing price as of August 9, 2005 ($1.35) and (b) the aggregate Warrant Price for such shares in
effect at such time. In the event that the holder elects to exchange this Warrant for shares of Common Stock under this Section 1A, the Holder must deliver the Warrant Certificate to the Company with the exercise form set forth as Exhibit B
duly executed.



2. The Warrant is amended by the addition
of Exhibit B following Exhibit A in the form attached hereto.



3. Except as set forth herein, all of the remaining terms and conditions of the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect.



ADVANT-E CORPORATIONBy:Jason K. Wadzinski, CEODate:

August 9, 2005HOLDERBy:Date:




13



---

EXHIBIT B

to Warrant Certificate



NOTICE OF ELECTION TO EXERCISE



TO:



The undersigned holder of a Warrant to Purchase (the Warrant) of Advant-e Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby irrevocably exercises its right to exchange this Warrant for
shares of Common Stock of the Company in an amount to be computed in accordance with Section 1A of the Warrant, and directs that the shares issuable and deliverable upon exercise be issued in the name of and delivered to the undersigned, unless
a different name has been indicated below. If shares are to be issued in the name of a person other than the undersigned, the undersigned will pay all transfer taxes payable with respect thereto.



Dated:



Number of Shares of Common Stock to be acquired via cashless exercise:



|         |  | 
|-------- |  | 
|Holder  
|         | 
|By:      |  | 
|         | 
|Printed: |  | 
|         | 
|Title:   |  | 



14
#### Skrzypzcak, Appellant, vs. Skrzypzcak, Respondent.

*April 14*

May *11, 1948.*

*539For the appellant there were briefs by *Dougherty, Arnold & Waters*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Suel O. Arnold.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Rubin & Ruppa*of Milwaukee, and oral argument by *Nathan Ruppa.*

Rosenberry, C. J.

Upon the trial the court found that the allegations of the plaintiff’s complaint were not proven; that for more than a year last past the plaintiff had been guilty of a course of extreme cruelty of and toward the defendant by means other than physical violence.

On appeal the plaintiff contends that the amount a\Varded the defendant as a final division of the property of the parties is excessive and that the finding that the plaintiff was guilty of cruel and inhuman treatment toward the defendant is against the great weight and clear preponderance of the evidence.

The court awarded the sum of $2,500 to the defendant as temporary and permanent alimony and as a final division of *540the estate of the parties. It was adjudged that the plaintiff should pay to the defendant $40 a month as and for support money for the minor child of the parties, awarded the plaintiff $450 for attorneys’ fees, and $54.79 for disbursements.

We have carefully examined the- record in this case. It presents a pure question of fact. The evidence offered and received on the trial, if believed, is ample to support the findings of the trial court. If the trial court had believed the plaintiff as against the defendant, no doubt the result would have been different. The court found that the plaintiff had accused the defendant of drunkenness, used vile and indecent language toward her, called her profane names, and his conduct toward her was such as to seriously affect the physical and mental well-being of the defendant. The findings amply support the judgment. No useful purpose would be served by setting out in detail the contentions of the parties or the evidence upon which the court based its decision.

With respect to the division of the estate of the parties it appears that at the time this action was begun the parties had a checking account of $4,919.55 in their joint names and, in addition to the household furniture, an automobile worth $1,100. The defendant testified that at the time of the trial she had no means of her own.

Under, the circumstances of this case it is considered that the court did not abuse its discretion in awarding the defendant $2,500 as a final division of the estate of the parties.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 20-3229

___________________________

Horace Crosby,

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellant,

v.

Brian Little; Brae Harper; Randy Barrett; Coye Cripps; Gentry School District,

Board of Education; Subteach USA, LLC; Education Solutions Services, LLC,

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendants - Appellees.

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville

 ____________

 Submitted: October 7, 2021

Filed: October 15, 2021

[Unpublished]

____________

Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. 

____________
PER CURIAM.

Horace Crosby appeals an order of the district court1 dismissing his civil action

without prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) for untimely service

of the defendants. After careful review of the record and the parties’ arguments on

appeal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing

the action. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________

1The Honorable Timothy L. Brooks, United States District Judge for the

Western District of Arkansas.

-2-
DAMIAN DESHANN HOGAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D15-2932

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 5, 2016.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Marianne L. Aho, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and Maria Ines Suber, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, 

and Quentin Humphrey, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROWE, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., CONCUR.
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  clickNsettle.com,   Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the three months ended September 30, 2005 as filed
with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the "Form
10-QSB"),  I, Roy  Israel,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that;

      (1)   The Form 10-QSB  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
            13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
            or 78o(d)); and

      (2)   The information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


Dated:  November 10, 2005

/s/ Roy Israel
---------------------------------
Roy Israel -- Chairman of the Board, CEO and President


                                       22
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 204 (Tuesday, October 22, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 84340]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24541]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings; Correction

AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission) is 
correcting a notice published in the Federal Register on October 18, 
2024. The document noticing a closed meeting for consideration of 
enforcement matters contained an incorrect date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-5964.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Correction

    In the Federal Register of Friday, October 18, 2024, in FR Doc. 
2024-24314, on page 83842 in the second column correct the TIME AND 
DATE caption to read:

TIME AND DATE: 9 a.m. EDT, Friday, October 25, 2024.

    Dated: October 18, 2024.
Robert Sidman,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2024-24541 Filed 10-18-24; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT VILLAGE OF FOUR SEASONS ASSOCIATION, INC., Petitioner

v. ELK MOUNTAIN SKI RESORT, INC., Respondent : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 80 MAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW , this 31st day of August, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED
.
Exhibit 31.2

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Patricia Giuliani-Rheaume, certify that

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of clickNsettle.com,
Inc. (the "registrant");

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) 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

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's first fiscal quarter
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

            (a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and

            (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: November 11, 2004


/s/ Patricia Giuliani-Rheaume
-------------------------------------------------
Patricia Giuliani-Rheaume - Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer


                                       26
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JAMES TIMOTHY HAYES,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 10-30071

D.C. No. 3:04-cr-00134-PA

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Oregon

Owen M. Panner, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 19, 2010** 

Before: O’SCANNLAIN, TALLMAN, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

James Timothy Hayes appeals from the eight-month sentence imposed upon

revocation of supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,

and we affirm.

FILED

OCT 28 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-30071

Hayes contends that the district court erred by considering legally

impermissible factors when imposing the sentence. The record reflects that the

district court considered the appropriate sentencing factors under 18 U.S.C.

§ 3583(e) and was sanctioning Hayes for “breach of trust.” See United States v.

Miqbel, 444 F.3d 1173, 1176, 1181-82 (9th Cir. 2006).

Hayes also contends that the district court procedurally erred by failing to

provide an adequate statement of reasons for the sentence imposed, and that the

sentence is substantively unreasonable. The record reflects that the district court

did not procedurally err and that, in light of the totality of the circumstances, the

sentence is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Carty, 520 F.3d 984,

991-93, 995 (9th Cir. 2008) (en banc); see also Miqbel, 444 F.3d at 1176 (sentence

imposed upon revocation of supervised release reviewed for reasonableness).

AFFIRMED.
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 98-4156EM

_____________ Helga Gallop, * * Appellant, *

* v. * * Appeal from the United States Secretary of the United States * District Court for the Eastern Department of the Army; Unknown * District of Missouri. Commander, United States Army * Finance and Accounting Center; United * [UNPUBLISHED] States Department of Justice, Janet * Reno, United States Attorney General, * * Appellees. *

_____________ Submitted: January 7, 1999

Filed: January 19, 1999

_____________ Before FAGG, BEAM, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________ PER CURIAM. HelgaGa llop appeals the district court's dismissal for lack of jurisdiction o f Gallop's suit against the Secretary of the Army and others. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district c ourt correctly determined it lacked subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47A(a).-2-

A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
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 Sterling Oil and Gas Company (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended November 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "report"), I, Timothy Barritt, 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; and





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





Dated this 10th day of  January, 2011.





/s/ Timothy BarrittTimothy BarrittPresident and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  EXHIBIT  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION   EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
REGISTRANT'S  UNAUDITED  CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH  FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS. THIS EXHIBIT SHALL NOT BE DEEMED FILED FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 11 OF
THE  SECURITIES  ACT OF 1933 AND SECTION 18 OF THE  SECURITIES  EXCHANGE  ACT OF
1934, OR OTHERWISE  SUBJECT TO THE LIABILITY OF SUCH  SECTIONS,  NOR SHALL IT BE
DEEMED A PART OF ANY OTHER FILING WHICH  INCORPORATES  THIS REPORT BY REFERENCE,
UNLESS SUCH OTHER FILING EXPRESSLY INCORPORATES THIS EXHIBIT BY REFERENCE.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-29-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           4,480
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,165
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      2,867
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,179
<PP&E>                                          58,118
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,361
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 132,005
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           41,603
<BONDS>                                         92,922
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,349
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,314)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   132,005
<SALES>                                        122,742
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               122,742
<CGS>                                           33,238
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  116,055
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,781
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,995
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,089)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (731)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,358)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (1,273)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,631)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.42)


</TABLE>
Exhibits 1-16 

for 

Petition for Rulemaking Under the Clean Air Act to List Coal Mines as a Source Category and 

to Regulate Methane and Other Harmful Air Emissions from Coal Mining Facilities Under 

Section 111 [Document # EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0358-0002]

Please see attachments in this docket entry.

Exhibit 1. U.S. GLOBAL CHANGE RESEARCH PROGRAM, GLOBAL CLIMATE CHANGE 

IMPACTS IN THE UNITED STATES 9 (2009).

Exhibit 2. IPCC, CLIMATE CHANGE 2007: SYNTHESIS REPORT, SUMMARY FOR

POLICYMAKER (Feb. 2007).

Exhibit 3. West, J., et al., “Global health benefits of mitigating ozone pollution with 

methane emission controls,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of 

the United States of America.

Exhibit 4. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY – ENERGY INFORMATION ADMINISTRATION, ANNUAL 

COAL REPORT 2007 (2009).

Exhibit 5. BLM, DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE WRIGHT AREA 

COAL LEASE APPLICATIONS,Wyoming Bureau of Land Management (excerpts).

Exhibit 6. BLM, FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PIT 14 COAL LEASE BY 

APPLICATION, Wyoming Bureau of Land Management (excerpts).

Exhibit 7. USFS, FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT DEER CREEK SHAFT AND E 

SEAM METHANE DRAINAGE WELLS PROJECT, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, 

Gunnison National Forest (excerpts).

Exhibit 8. U.S. EPA, Comments on Draft Environmental Impact Statement for West 

Antelope II Coal Lease Application.

Exhibit 9. U.S. EPA, Comments on South Gillette Area Coal Lease Applications Draft 

Environmental Impact Statement.

Exhibit 10. U.S. EPA, Comments on Draft EIS for Wright Area Coal Lease Applications.

Exhibit 11. U.S. EPA, Comments on Proposed Red Cliff Mine Project.

Exhibit 12. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control 

Division, Construction Permit No. 08ME0506F (Nov. 2008).
Exhibit 13. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Air Pollution Control 

Division, Construction Permit No. 09LA0590 (Aug. 20, 2009).

Exhibit 14. U.S. EPA, Coal Methane Outreach Project, 2006 International News.

Exhibit 15. United Kingdom’s Coal Authority, Coal Mine Methane Activity Within The UK, 

Coal Mine Methane Operators Activities.

Exhibit 16. Harworth Power Ltd., CMM Flaring PowerPoint (Sep. 2007).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In the Matter of

BARRY JAY BERAN, A/K/A BARRY J. 

BERAN

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2952 Disciplinary Docket No. 3

No. 25 DB 2023

(Supreme Court of New Jersey, D-120 

September Term 2021)

Attorney Registration No. 35896

(Out of State)

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 3

rd day of May, 2023, having failed to respond to a Notice and 

Order directing him to provide reasons against the imposition of reciprocal discipline, 

Barry Jay Beran, a/k/a Barry J. Beran, is suspended from the practice of law in the 

Commonwealth of Pennsylvania for a period of five years, consecutive to the three-year 

term of suspension ordered by this Court on October 5, 2022. He shall comply with the

provisions of Pa.R.D.E. 217.