alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
10.6


 


Power of
Attorney


 


I,
                ,
a citizen of the People’s Republic of China, with an identification number of
                                ,
a holder of
              %
of the equity of Beijing Xueda Information Technology Co. Ltd. (the “Domestic
Company”) (“My Equity Interest”), hereby, with respect to My Equity Interest,
irrevocably authorizes Xuecheng Century (Beijing) Information Technology Co.
Ltd (“WFOE”) to exercise the following rights within the period of validity of
this Power of Attorney:


 


I authorize WFOE to act as my sole and exclusive agent
to exercise in my name all my rights with respect to My Equity Interest,
including but not limited to: (1) attending the shareholders’ meetings of
the Domestic Company and sign all relevant shareholder resolutions in my name; (2) exercise
all my rights as a shareholder as set forth in laws and the constitutional
documents of the Domestic Company, and (3) act as my authorized
representative to nominate and appoint the legal representative, chairman,
director, executive director, supervisor, general manager and other senior
managers of the Domestic Company.


 


WFOE shall have the right to, within the scope of its
authorization, sign the transfer agreement agreed upon in exclusive purchase right
agreements (I shall be required to be a party to such agreements) on my behalf
and timely enforce the Pledge Agreement and Exclusive Purchase Right Contract
entered into on even date herewith by me. 
The execution of such right does not restrict this Power of Attorney in
any way.


 


Unless as provided elsewhere, any instructions issued
by the WFOE with respect to My Equity Interest shall be instructions that can
be delivered based on WFOE’s own assessment and without any oral and written
instruction from me.


 


I agree to acknowledge the following: any action by
the WFOE with respect to My Equity Interest shall be deemed to be my actions;
any document executed by the WFOE shall be deemed to be executed by me.


 


WFOE shall have the right to assign this Power of
Attorney and may, with respect to the matters set forth above and the exercise
of rights of My Equity Interest, empower any other individual or entity to act,
without notifying me or obtaining my consent.


 


So long as I am a shareholder of the Domestic Company,
this Power of Attorney is irrevocable and continually valid, commencing on the
date of execution of this Power of Attorney.


 


During the term of this Power of Attorney, I
hereby renounce all rights relating to My Equity Interest with which I have empowered
the WFOE with this Power of Attorney, and will not exercise such rights.


 


 


	
   

  	
   

  	
  signature.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  August 28, 2009
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

229) ll-K- (I) -42 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:56 AM Sheet 229 of 325 
P.2 

(0) 

OH 

II-K-(I)-42 

TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT REPORT FOR INDUSTRIAL BOILER 

APPLICATIONS: PARTICULATE COLLECTION. 

GCA Corp. 

December 1979. 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(I)-42
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-20-00298-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 48th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 048-315688-20

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

APPY HEALTH, INC., Appellant

V.

CAMDEN KELLY CORPORATION, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

We have considered “Appellant Appy Health, Inc.’s Unopposed Motion to 

Dismiss Appeal.” We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 

42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

Each party must bear its own costs of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d), 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: February 4, 2021
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

February 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
129619 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: 129619 COA: 253450 St Clair CC: 03-002145-FH GEORGE JAMES HARRIS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 9, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

t0221 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 27, 2006

Clerk
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-1905

BRENDA C. ARMSTEAD, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus JERRY WHITMORE, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District Judge. (CA-02-1098-1) Submitted: September 30, 2003 Decided: October 7, 2003 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brenda C. Armstead, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Brenda C. Armstead seeks to appeal the district court’s order adopting the order of the magistrate judge denying her request to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing her civil complaint. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. Parties are accorded thirty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an appeal, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on May 28, 2003. The notice of appeal was filed on July 21, 2003. Because Armstead failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny her motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 177 (Thursday, November 20, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2333]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

TRIBUTE TO DAVID TYSON AND HIS INDUCTION TO THE GREATER HUNTINGTON WALL 
                                OF FAME

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO

                            of west virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, November 20, 2008

  Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a friend and true 
West Virginian David Tyson.
  Mr. Tyson is a lawyer from Huntington, WV who continually puts his 
community and State first. On October 2, 2008, David Tyson was inducted 
into the Greater Huntington Wall of Fame by the City of Huntington 
Foundation. David has worked tirelessly for his community as well as 
the State of West Virginia.
  In April 2002, David was appointed by President Bush to the national 
advisory board for the Kennedy Center in Washington. He continually 
serves as an ambassador for the arts. Since becoming a member of that 
board, David has been interested in restoration; on a local level 
becoming involved with the Keith-Albee Performing Arts Center in 
Huntington. Mr. Tyson is best known for his involvement in this 
project, which culminated in the theater serving as the location for 
the premier of the Warner Brothers major motion picture release ``We 
Are Marshall.'' Mr. Tyson was also recognized as the Citizen of the 
Year in 2007 by the Herald-Dispatch, the major news publication in 
Huntington, West Virginia.
  I applaud David Tyson's unending commitment to civic duty.

                          ____________________
```
United States of America 

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

 1120 20th Street, N.W., Ninth Floor 

 Washington, DC 20036-3457 

SECRETARY OF LABOR, 

Complainant, OSHRC Docket No. 09-1284 

v. 

SHAW AREVA MOX SERVICES, LLC, 

Respondent. 

BRIEFING NOTICE 

The issues that follow have been identified by the Review Commission as of particular 

interest on review. The parties, however, are free to brief issues that are presented in the Petition 

for Discretionary Review in addition to that below. 

(1) Under Citation 1, Item 2, did the judge err in affirming a violation of 29 

C.F.R. § 1926.404(f)(6) with respect to the adapter? In addressing this 

question, the parties are asked to discuss the following: 

a. Does the cited provision’s applicability to the adapter depend upon 

whether a requirement to ground the adapter exists elsewhere in 29 

C.F.R. subpart K? 

b. Did the judge err in finding exposure to the conditions alleged 

regarding the adapter? 

(2) Under Citation 1, Item 2, did the judge err in finding that the Respondent had 

constructive knowledge of the conditions alleged regarding the electrical cord 

for the fuel tank pump? 

The parties are advised that when the merits or characterization of an item are before the 

Commission for review, the appropriateness of the penalty is also subject to review. 

Accordingly, the parties may address the amount of the penalty if they so choose. 

 All briefs are to be filed in accordance with Commission Rule 93.1

 The first brief is to be 

filed within 40 days of this notice. A party who does not intend to file a brief must notify the 

 

1

 The Commission requests that all briefs include an alphabetical table of authorities with 

references to the pages on which they are cited, and that an asterisk be placed in the left-hand 

margin of the table to indicate those authorities on which the brief principally relies. The 
Commission in writing setting forth the reason therefore within the applicable time for filing 

briefs, and shall serve a copy on all other parties. The time for filing briefs (or similar notices of 

intent) of opposing parties shall commence on the date of service. 

 

 BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION 

Dated: January 29, 2010 /s/ 

 Ray H. Darling, Jr. 

 Executive Secretary 

 

Commission also requests that copies of cited authority, other than statutes, case law, law journal 

articles and legal treatises, be provided to the Commission and to the opposing party. Parties 

should be cautioned that these materials will be considered only if appropriate. 
09-1284 

NOTICE IS GIVEN TO THE FOLLOWING: 

Charles F. James, Esq. 

Counsel for Appellate Litigation 

Office of the Solicitor 

U.S. Department of Labor, Room S 4004 

200 Constitution Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20210 

Carl B. Carruth, Esq. 

McNair Law Firm, P.A. 

Post Office Box 11390 

Columbia, South Carolina 29211
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                           Subsidiaries of Registrant


Name of Subsidiary                               Place of Incorporation
----------------------------------              ------------------------
RATHM, Inc.                                     Delaware (United States)
RHOMS, Inc.                                     Delaware (United States)
RGarnet, Inc.                                   Delaware (United States)
RAxxent, Inc.                                   Delaware (United States)
RCanada, Inc.                                   Delaware (United States)
Rhythms Winfire, Inc.                           Delaware (United States)
RMegaPath (f/k/a RPhoenix, Inc.)                Delaware (United States)
Rhythms Links Inc.                              Delaware (United States)
Rhythms Links Inc. - Virginia                   Virginia (United States)
Rhythms NetConnections Europe B.V.              Netherlands
Rhythms Deutschland GmbH                        Germany
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 219 (Wednesday, November 13, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 89666]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-26278]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: November 13, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 25, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 548 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-173, K2025-171.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-26278 Filed 11-12-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3921 — Advent/Herlitz)

(2005/C 237/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 19 September 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 National Property Analysts Master
Limited Partnership ("NPAMLP") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Robert McKinney, President of Feldman International, Inc.,
the Equity General Partner of NPAMLP 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) Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of NPAMLP.

                      NATIONAL PROPERTY ANALYSTS MASTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
                                    (Registrant)

                      Date: July 14, 2006

                      By: Feldman International Inc., its equity general partner

                      By: /s/ Robert McKinney
                          --------------------------------------
                      Name: Robert McKinney
                      Title: President
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a)

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Matthew J. Espe, Chief Executive Officer of IKON Office Solutions, Inc., certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of IKON Office Solutions, Inc.;



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 internal 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 most recent financial 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: December 29, 2003



|/s/ MATTHEW J. ESPE                  |  | 
|------------------------------------ |  | 
|Matthew J. Espe                      |  | 
|Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |  |
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

March 22, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

129605 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

EMBOSSING PRINTERS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 129605 

 COA: 252894 

Ct of Claims: 02-000090-MT 

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 12, 2005 

judgment 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. To the extent 

that the Court of Appeals opinion rejects the “incidental to service” test adopted by this 

Court in Catalina Marketing v Dep’t of Treasury, 470 Mich 13 (2004), it is VACATED. 

CAVANAGH, J., would deny leave to appeal without further statement found in the 

majority’s order. 

s0315 

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. 

March 22, 2006 

Clerk
LEGAL02/31102807v1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY OF LABOR, )

)

Complainant, ) Docket No. 08-1104

)

v. )

)

IMPERIAL SUGAR COMPANY; )

IMPERIAL-SAVANNAH, L.P. )

)

)

Respondents. )

)

RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS CITATION 2, ITEMS 4 THROUGH 15

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 2200.2(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 12(c),

29 U.S.C. § 658(a), 29 C.F.R. § 1903.14(b) and other applicable law, Respondents Imperial

Sugar Company and Imperial-Savannah, L.P. (collectively “Imperial”) respectfully move to

dismiss Citation 2, Items 4 through 15 on the grounds that the allegations contained in Citation 2,

Items 4 through 15 fail to state a claim a claim upon which relief can be granted because they do

not provide the Respondents fair notice of the nature of the alleged violations and do not describe

with particularity the nature of the alleged violations. Judgment on the pleadings is therefore

appropriate on these Items and should be entered in Imperial’s favor.

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 2200.40(a), counsel for Respondents attempted to confer with

Complainant’s counsel regarding this Motion. As of the time of this filing, Complainant’s

counsel has not responded to Respondents’ counsel’s January 26, 2009 message regarding

conferral, and Respondent thus presumes that Complainant opposes this Motion.
- 2 -

LEGAL02/31102807v1

Respectfully submitted, this 27

th day of January, 2009.

/s/ Charles H. Morgan

Charles H. Morgan

charlie.morgan@alston.com

Matthew J. Gilligan

matt.gilligan@alston.com

Ashley D. Brightwell

ashley.brightwell@alston.com

Jeremy D. Tucker

jeremy.tucker@alston.com

ALSTON & BIRD LLP

1201 West Peachtree Street

Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424

(404) 881-7000

FAX: (404) 253-8757

Attorneys for Respondents
- 3 -

LEGAL02/31102807v1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

SECRETARY OF LABOR, )

)

Complainant )

)

v. ) Docket No. 08-1104

)

IMPERIAL SUGAR COMPANY; )

IMPERIAL-SAVANNAH, L.P. )

)

Respondents. )

____________________________________)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that all parties have consented that all papers required to be served in this action

may be served and filed electronically. I further certify that a copy of RESPONDENTS’

MOTION TO DISMISS CITATION 2, ITEMS 4 THROUGH 15 and MEMORANDUM IN

SUPPORT was electronically served on January 27, 2009 on the following counsel for

Complainant:

Karen E. Mock

Mock.Karen@dol.gov

Angela F. Donaldson

Donaldson.Angela@dol.gov

Office of the Solicitor

U.S. Department of Labor

61 Forsyth Street S.W.

Room 7T10

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

/s/ Charles H. Morgan

Charles H. Morgan

Alston & Bird LLP

1201 West Peachtree Street

Atlanta, Georgia 30309-3424

charlie.morgan@alston.com