alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
April 20, 1999

Seafish Partners
C/o Estudio Chimel
Avenue Luis Maria Campos #799
1426 Capital Federal
Buenos Aires, Argentina

         Re:  Class C 11% Cumulative Non-Convertible Redeemable Preferred Stock,
              Series A ("Class C Preferred Stock")
              ------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Sirs:

This letter confirms that as of the date hereof, Software Publishing Corporation
Holdings, Inc. ("SPCH" or the "Company") has agreed with Seafish Partners
("Seafish") that should SPCH call for redemption of any shares of its Class C
Preferred Stock, pursuant to Section 5 of the certificate of designations
relating thereto, within forty-five (45) calendar days of this agreement, the
Company will allow Seafish an option to purchase from the Company up to 120,000
shares of its X-ceed, Inc. common stock holdings at a price equal to $14.625 per
share.

The purchase price of the X-ceed, Inc. common stock will be paid in the
following manner:

          1. With respect to 68,000 shares, cash of $994,500.00.
          2. With respect to 52,000  shares,  prepaid  advertising in accordance
             with our discussions, with a value of $1.0 million.

If the above accurately states the agreement between the Company and Seafish,
please so indicate by signing where appropriate below.

Sincerely,

Software Publishing Corporation Holdings, Inc.

By:    /s/ Mark E. Leininger
       President and Chief Operating Officer

Accepted and Agreed to:
Seafish Partners:

By:    /s/Paul Stark
Name:  Paul Stark
Title: Agent


                                      -21-
[DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 12

- 10829

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 3:10

- cv - 00978

- RBD

- JBT

MOBILE SHELTER SYSTEMS USA, INC., Plaintiff

- Appellant,

versus GRATE PALLET SOLUTIONS, LLC, Jacksonville, Florida, THOMAS R. BUCK, Individually, Jacksonville, Florida, Defendants

- Appellees.

_________ _______________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida

________________________ (February 1, 2013) Before HULL, WILSON and HILL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Case: 12-10829 Date Filed: 02/01/2013 Page: 1 of 22 After thoroughly reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, and with the benefit of oral argument, we discern no reversible error in the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of Grate Pallet Solutions, LLC. Mobile Shelter System USA, Inc.’s product features are functional; therefore, they do not receive trade

- dr e ss protection under s ection 43(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a). See Dippin’ Dots, Inc. v. Frosty Bites Distribution, LLC , 369 F.3d 1197, 1202 (11th Cir. 2004) (holding that the features of a product’s design must be primarily

non - functional to r eceive trade

- dress protection). The judgment of the district court is affirmed. AFFIRMED

. Case: 12-10829 Date Filed: 02/01/2013 Page: 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 674 Referral Instructions Senate (RIS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 674

   To require truth-in-budgeting with respect to the on-budget trust 
                                 funds.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 19, 1999

Mr. Fitzgerald introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred jointly pursuant to the order of August 4, 1977, to the 
 Committees on the Budget and Governmental Affairs, with instructions 
that if one Committee reports, the other Committee have thirty days to 
                        report or be discharged

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To require truth-in-budgeting with respect to the on-budget trust 
                                 funds.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Truth-in-Budgeting Act of 1999''.

SEC. 2. HONEST REPORTING OF THE DEFICIT.

    (a) In General.--Effective for fiscal year 2001, the President's 
budget, the budget report of CBO required under section 202(e) of the 
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and the concurrent resolution on the 
budget shall include--
            (1) the receipts and disbursements totals of the on-budget 
        trust funds, including the projected levels for at least the 
        next 5 fiscal years; and
            (2) the deficit or surplus excluding the on-budget trust 
        funds, including the projected levels for at least the next 5 
        fiscal years.
    (b) Itemization.--Effective for fiscal year 2001, the President's 
budget and the budget report of the CBO required under section 202(e) 
of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 shall include an itemization of 
the on-budget trust funds for the budget year, including receipts, 
outlays, and balances.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



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 the Quarterly Report of Mitcham Industries, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
Christopher C. Siffert, Vice President & Corporate Controller 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 the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company. /s/ Christopher C. SiffertChristopher C. Siffert
Vice President & Corporate Controller
June 11, 2004
 22
#### THE STATE TO THE USE OF J. C. BARNES & AL. vs. ELIZABETH SHANNONHOUSE & AL.

tVhen a legacy is given to four children by name, and one of them' dies hi the lifetime of the testator, his legacy is lapsed and must go, as undisposed property, to the next of kin of the testator.

The case of *Johnson*v. *Johnson, 3*Ired. Eq. 426, cited1 arid approved.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Pasquotank, at the Spring Term, 1846, his Honor Judge Bailey presiding.

The testator, Thomas L. Shannonhouse, in the tenth elause of his will, gave to four of his children, naming them, the residue of his chattel property, and directed his executor to convert it into money, and equally divide' it between his said four children, “ except one' (Susan Forbes,) to have five hundred dollars less, for the two negro girls already given to her.” William Shanon-house, one of the four legatees, died in the lifetime of the testator. The Judge was of the opinion that his share did not survise to the other three legatees, but lapsed, and was undisposed of by the will, and went to the next of kin of the testators.

A. *Moore,*for the plaintiff.

No counsel for the defendant,-

*10Daniel, J.

We are of the same opinion with the Judge below. In *Johnston*v. *Johnston, 3*Iredell Eq. 426, where the testator bequeathed the residue of his estate, not disposed of, to his wife and her six children, to be equally divided between them, and their heirs, share and share, alike ; A, one of the six children, died in the lifetime of the testator. *Held,*that this bequest was not to the children *as a class,*but as if each had been particularly named. And, as each was entitled to only one seventh, the share would not be enlarged by the death of one in the lifetime of the testator; and that the share of *A.*lapsed and was undisposed of, and belonged to the next of *kin*of the testator, and to his widow. In the case now before us, each of the four children was particularly named by the testator. The share of William, who died in the testator’s lifetime, never vested in him, but lapsed, and became so much of the undisposed personal property of the testator, and of course went to the testator’s next of kin. The judgment must be affirmed.

Per. Curiam. Judgment affirmed-
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 161 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[House]
[Page H10816]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

   COMMUNICATION FROM LEGISLATIVE DIRECTOR, THE HONORABLE WILLIAM J. 
                     JEFFERSON, MEMBER OF CONGRESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following 
communication from Angelle Kwemo, Legislative Director, the Honorable 
William J. Jefferson, Member of Congress:

                                    Congress of the United States,

                                     House of Representatives,

                                  Washington, DC, October 1, 2008.
     Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
     Speaker, House of Representatives,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Madam Speaker: This is to notify you formally, 
     pursuant to rule VIII of the Rules of the House of 
     Representatives, that I have been served with a subpoena, 
     issued in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of 
     Virginia, for testimony in a criminal case.
       After consultation with the Office of General Counsel, I 
     have determined that compliance with the subpoena is 
     consistent with the precedents and privileges of the House.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Angelle Kwemo,
     Legislative Director.

                          ____________________
```
Exhibit 10.30

January 6,
2010

Mr. Richard
M. Weil
612 Vista Lane
Laguna Beach, CA 92651

Dear
Dick:

We
have greatly enjoyed getting to know you over the last few months and are excited about you joining us as the Chief Executive Officer of Janus Capital Group Inc. We believe you
possess the personal and professional characteristics to lead this organization in the years ahead and will have the ability to make a significant impact on our future direction and growth. On behalf
of Janus Capital Group Inc. (the "Company"), I am pleased to extend to you an offer of employment with the Company on the following terms and conditions:





---





---





[continued
on following page]

This
offer expires on January 11, 2010. We look forward to supporting you in building a preeminent investment management organization and are confident we will achieve great
success under your leadership and direction. We are excited to have you join the Company and anxiously await your response to this offer.

Sincerely,JANUS CAPITAL GROUP, INC.By:Name:Title:Agreed and Accepted:By:Richard M. WeilDate:


---



QuickLinks
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED MAY 21, 2015

NO. 03-15-00107-CV

Suzanna Eckchum a/k/a Susan Eckhert, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas for the Protection of Hal Ketchum, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF COMAL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED -- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the trial court on January 22, 2015. Having reviewed 

the record, the Court agrees that this appeal should be consolidated into cause number 03-15-

00270-CV. Therefore, the Court consolidates these causes, transfers all the records and filings in 

this cause number to 03-15-00270-CV and dismisses cause number 03-15-00107-CV. The 

appellant shall pay all costs relating to this appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
EXHIBIT 99.2

                            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 the quarterly report of Scantek Medical Inc (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Zsigmond L. Sagi, President and Chief
Financial 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) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates
presented and consolidated result of operations of the Company for the period
presented.

Dated: February 14, 2003

                                         By: /s/ Zsigmond L. Sagi
                                             ----------------------------------
                                                 Zsigmond L. Sagi, President
                                                 and Chief Financial Officer

This certification has been furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 214 (Tuesday, November 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 87874-87875]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25619]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

[Public Notice: 2024-6098]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to the 
Office of Management and Budget for Review and Approval; Comment 
Request; EIB 84-01 Application for Export Working Capital Guarantee

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the United States.

ACTION: Notice of information collection; request for comment.

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

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), pursuant 
to the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as

[[Page 87875]]

amended, facilitates the finance of the export of U.S. goods and 
services. As part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and 
respondent burden, EXIM invites the general public and other Federal 
Agencies to comment on the proposed information collection, as required 
by the paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before January 6, 2025 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically on 
WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV (EIB 84-01), by email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c4b7a9a5b6abeaafa5b6a5afa5b0b7a5aaadb784a1bcada9eaa3abb2"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3a49575b485514515b485b515b4e495b5453497a5f425357145d554c">[email protected]</span></a>, 
or by mail to Smaro Karakatsanis, Export-Import Bank of the United 
States, 811 Vermont Ave. NW, Washington, DC. The application tool can 
be reviewed at: https://img.exim.gov/s3fs-public/pub/pending/EIB+84-01+EXIM_WCGP_Application.pdf.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request additional information, 
please contact Smaro Karakatsanis, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#dcafb1bdaeb3f2b7bdaebdb7bda8afbdb2b5af9cb9a4b5b1f2bbb3aa"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1f6c727e6d7031747e6d7e747e6b6c7e71766c5f7a67767231787069">[email protected]</span></a>, 202-
565-3655.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title and Form Number: EIB 84-01, Application for Export Working 
Capital Guarantee.
    OMB Number: 3048-0003.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Need and Use: This form provides EXIM staff with the information 
necessary to determine if the application and transaction is eligible 
for EXIM assistance under their export working capital guarantee 
program.
    Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export 
of U.S. goods and services.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 150.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 2 hours.
    Annual Burden Hours: 300 hours.
    Frequency of Reporting of Use: Annually.

    Dated: October 30, 2024.
Andrew Smith,
Records Officer.
[FR Doc. 2024-25619 Filed 11-4-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
---

**Exhibit 32.1**

**OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE**

In connection with the Annual Report of Envirokare Tech, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB/A No. 3 for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, I, George Kazantzis, President (President and Principal Financial Officer) and Nicholas Pappas (Chief Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

That the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Certificate on this 4th day of April 2006./s/ George Kazantzis
     Name: George Kazantzis
     Title: President (Principal Financial Officer)/s/ Nicholas Pappas
     Name: Nicholas Pappas
     Title: Chief Executive Officer (Chief Executive Officer)
#### JOS, MASTERS AND OTHERS *against*F. J. PRENTISS AND OTHERS.

A Court of Equity will not entertain a t>ill for a discovery which seeks to set aside a prior deed of trust on account of usury.

Appeal from the Court of Equity of Craven County, at Eall Term, 1854.

*DorwieU and J. W. Bryan*for the plaintiffs.

*J. II Bryan*for the defendants.

Hash, C. J.

The bill seeks to set aside a conveyance made by the defendant Prentiss, to the defendant Moore, upon the charge that it is usurious,1'and for that purpose, calls upon Moore for a discovery. To this portion of the bill, the defendant Moore, opposes a demurrer,'upon the ground, that by the known and settled “rules of this Honorable Court, no person is, or ought to be compelled to set forth or discover any matter or thing, which doth, or may, subject him to any pains or penalties or *forfeitures 'whatever!*The demurrer must be sustained.-— The right of a Court of Equity to enforce a discovery, lies at the foundation of its general power, differing from a Court of Law in administering justice between the parties before it, it constrains a defendant to bear witness against himself, and it provides for the defendant the right to put the plaintiff on the stand by a cross-bill, and to require of him a like discovery where needed. Put in requiring a discovery, this Court does not depart from the general policy of the law. It will not require a defendant to answer questions or make discovery of matters tending to criminate himself, or to expose him to a penalty ora forfeiture. The first maxim on tliis subj ect, stated by Mr. Adams, page 3,is “that no man needdiscovermatterstendingtocrimi-nate himsetf, or to expose him to a penalty or a forfeiture. lie has a right to refuse an answer, not only to the broad and lead*63ing fact, but as to any incidental fact which may form a link in the chain of evidence, if any one should choose to indict him.” If the objectionable matter appears upon the face of the bill, the defendant, as he has done in this ease, may demur, as if it alleges an usurious contract, &c., if it does not so appear, he may avail himself of the objection by plea; and if the facts are of such a nature as to exclude both a demurrer and a plea, he may obtain the defence in his answer. ■ The protection does not extend to frauds. Adams 4. The bill charges that the deed of trust made by the defendant Prentiss, to the defendant, Bishop, in trust for the benefit of the defendant, Moore, and dated the 30th day of September 1848, and prior to the one made by said Prentiss to Joseph Masters in trust for the plaintiff, was usurious, and seeks to set it aside.

The bill then, is open to the objection stated in the demurrer : it seeks a discovery from the defendant Moore, of facts, which, if true, subject him to a forfeiture'of the preference given to him by the deed of trust to Bishop. In that deed of trust he has an interest for the security of the debts enumerated in it, as due to the defendant by Prentiss. He is not, by the rules of Equity, bound to make any discovery, and his demurrer is sustained, and the interlocutory decree affirmed.

Decree below affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 501 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 501

  To address resource management issues in Glacier Bay National Park, 
                                Alaska.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 2, 1999

 Mr. Murkowski (for himself and Mr. Stevens) introduced the following 
bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                           Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To address resource management issues in Glacier Bay National Park, 
                                Alaska.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Glacier Bay Fisheries Act''.

SEC. 2. RESOURCE HARVESTING.

    (a) In Glacier Bay National Park, the Secretary of the Interior 
shall accommodate--
                    (1) the conduct of subsistence fishing and 
                gathering under title VIII of the Alaska National 
                Interest Lands Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 3111 et. 
                seq.); and
                    (2) the conduct by the State of Alaska, in 
                accordance with the principles of sustained yield, of 
                marine commercial fisheries, except fishing for 
                Dungeness crab in the waters of the Beardslee Islands 
                and upper Dundas Bay.

SEC. 3. CLAIMS FOR LOST EARNINGS.

    Section 3(g) of Public Law 91-383 (16 U.S.C. 1a-2(g)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
            ``(3) to pay an aggregate of not more than $2,000,000 per 
        fiscal year in actual and punitive damages to persons that, at 
        any time after January 1, 1999, suffered or suffer a loss in 
        earnings from commercial fisheries legally conducted in the 
        marine waters of Glacier Bay National Park, due to any action 
        by an officer, employee, or agent of any Federal department or 
        agency, that interferes with any person legally fishing or 
        attempting to fish in such commercial fisheries.''.
                                 <all>
```