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

                               FOURTH AMENDMENT
                                      TO
                         EAGLE HARDWARE & GARDEN, INC.
                         EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN

     Pursuant to authority vested in the corporate officers of Eagle Hardware 
& Garden, Inc., a Washington corporation, by resolution of its Board of 
Directors, the Eagle Hardware & Garden, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan 
("Plan") is hereby amended, effective January 1, 1998, as follows:

1.  AUTHORIZED DISTRIBUTIONS FOR ACCOUNTS LESS THAN $5,000 -- Sections 
    6.4 and 7.6 shall be amended to change each reference to $3,500 
    therein to $5,000.

2.  TIMING OF DISTRIBUTIONS UPON TERMINATION -- Section 6.1(a) shall be 
    amended to provide that distribution of a Participant's Account 
    shall commence as soon as administratively feasible following the 
    participant's termination of employment, provided that the 
    participant consents to a distribution in accordance with Section 
    6.4. If the participant does not consent to a distribution, then an 
    account exceeding $5,000 will not be distributed until the 
    participant reaches age 65.

     This document shall constitute one of the documents under which the Plan 
is administered until the amendments made hereby are reflected in an 
amendment and restatement of the Plan. This amendment shall supersede any 
conflicting provisions in the plan document, as previously amended.

EAGLE HARDWARE & GARDEN, INC.          COMMITTEE UNDER 
                                       EAGLE HARDWARE &
                                       GARDEN, INC. EMPLOYEE STOCK
                                       OWNERSHIP PLAN


By  /s/ [Illegible]                    By:  /s/ [Illegible]
    -------------------------               -------------------------
Its      President/CEO                 Date:         6/1/98
    -------------------------               -------------------------
       (Title of Officer)

Date:      6/1/98                      By:  /s/ [Illegible]
     ------------------------               --------------------------

                                       Date:         6/1/98
                                            --------------------------
### 7705 Technology Drive Melbourne Florida 32904

Phone 321-951-9464 Fax 321-728-9071 May 7th, 2015

Supplement to submittal under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ- OAR-2014-0198 Air and Radiation Docket U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW Mail Code 6102T Washington DC 20460

RE: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Change of Li sting Status for Certain Substitutes under the Significant New Alternatives Policy Program (79 Fed . Reg. 46,126 April 3, 2014

Dear Sir/Madam:

Structural Composites, Inc and its sister company C ompsys, Inc (SC), of Melbourne Florida has commented (20 Oct 14) on the Environmental Protecti on Agency’s (EPA) proposed rule titled “ Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Change of Listin g Status for Certain Substitutes Under the Signific ant New Alternatives Program” published in the Federal Register on August 6, 2014.

We want to add new consideration based on our meeti ng with Ms. Drusilla Hufford and the EPA Snap team. Please add that as our Preform product is de monstrated to have a net savings in GHG and as such we should not be subject to SNAP and we should be a llowed continued use of this GHG saving material. Please let me know if you need any supporting mater ials as a result of our discussions or submittals. In Particular, the supporting data for the thermal and weight savings estimates from the use of Prisma Technology.

Use of PRISMA in the boating sector has already res ulted in GHG savings though increased fuel efficiency. Our work in the semitrailer and truck body market validates the GHG savings submitted in our first letter. These will start to have a posit ive impact on GHG as the technology deploys into th is market over the next 24 months. We trust that the EPA will look at the GHG over the life cycle of our end products and will agree that in the case of Pri sma the small non-recurring GHG during production i s dwarfed by the GHG savings over the operational lif e of the product.

Also please let us know if you are in need of any s upporting materials as a result of our discussions or submittals. Unless we hear otherwise we will consi der that you accept the material as presented.

As we have no alternative for our preforming techno logy and as we can clearly demonstrate that our technology has a GHG Return on Investment in life c ycle GHG, we hereby request a full exemption for use of 134a as a blowing agent in foam used in our composite preforms.

Thank you,

Scott M. Lewit President 321-252-4566 slewit@aol.com
### EXHIBIT 99.1



### Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, William N. Hagler, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Intermountain Refining Co., Inc. certify that:

1. I have reviewed the annual report on Form 10-KSB of
Intermountain Refining Co., Inc;
2. Based on my knowledge, this annual 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 annual report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other
financial information included in this annual 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 annual
report.

Date:   May 17, 2006/s/ William N.
HaglerWilliam N.
HaglerPresident and Chief Executive
Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE QUARTER ENDED AUGUST 31,
1997 AND THE UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT AUGUST 31, 1997 AND THE
ACCOMPANYING NOTES THERETO AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                               8
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,760
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (2,982)
<INVENTORY>                                      6,390
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                24,240
<PP&E>                                           1,803
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (680)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  62,441
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,723
<BONDS>                                          5,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,713
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    62,441
<SALES>                                          7,702
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,437
<CGS>                                            3,526
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,748
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 5,295<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,659<F2>
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,148)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,148)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,148)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES $846 OF ONE-TIME COSTS
<F2>INCLUDES $450 OF ONE-TIME COSTS
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Theresa Lynn BUTLER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2171

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 9, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Robert Riddle CLINTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-873

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 10, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1409 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1409

 To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating 
                         the Fairness Doctrine.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2021

 Mr. Duncan (for himself, Mrs. Boebert, Mr. Bishop of North Carolina, 
  Mr. Perry, and Mr. Norman) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prevent the Federal Communications Commission from repromulgating 
                         the Fairness Doctrine.

    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 ``Reassuring that the United States 
Has Wide And Scrupulous Rhetorical Insight to Garnish Honest Thought 
Act of 2021'' or the ``RUSH WAS RIGHT Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. FAIRNESS DOCTRINE PROHIBITED.

    Title III of the Communications Act of 1934 is amended by inserting 
after section 303 (47 U.S.C. 303) the following new section:

``SEC. 303A. LIMITATION ON GENERAL POWERS: FAIRNESS DOCTRINE.

    ``Notwithstanding section 303 or any other provision of this Act or 
any other Act authorizing the Commission to prescribe rules, 
regulations, policies, doctrines, standards, or other requirements, the 
Commission shall not have the authority to prescribe any rule, 
regulation, policy, doctrine, standard, or other requirement that has 
the purpose or effect of reinstating or repromulgating (in whole or in 
part) the requirement that broadcasters present opposing viewpoints on 
controversial issues of public importance, commonly referred to as the 
`Fairness Doctrine', as repealed in General Fairness Doctrine 
Obligations of Broadcast Licensees, 50 Fed. Reg. 35418 (1985).''.
                                 <all>
```
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 7, 2019

No. 04

- 18

- 00916

- CV

Caleb ANKHAMEN, Appellant

v.

VIEW AT ENCINO COMMONS,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CV04051 Honorable Timothy Johnson, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant’s brief was due February 27, 2019. Neither the brief nor a motion for

extension of time has been filed.

We order appellant, Caleb AnkhAmen, to file, by March 18, 2019, appellant’s brief and a written response reasonably explaining his failure t o timely file the brief. If appellant fails to file a brief and the written response by the date ordered, the appeal may be dismissed for want of prosecution without further notice. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(a).

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on

this 7th day of March, 2019

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
**Exhibit 17**

 

**CONSENT OF RICHARD J. LAMBERT**

 

I consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-Fof New Gold Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of reference to my name in connectionwith, and to the use of information derived from, the technical reports entitled “Technical Report on the Mesquite Mine,Imperial County, California, U.S.A.”, dated February 28, 2014, and “Technical Report on the Peak Gold Mines, New SouthWales, Australia,” dated March 25, 2013, included in the Annual Information Form of New Gold Inc. for the financial yearended December 31, 2014, and I consent to the incorporation by reference of such information in the registration statement onForm S-8 (File No. 333-160500) of New Gold Inc. 

 

Dated this 27th day of March, 2015

 

 

*/s/ Richard J. Lambert	*

Richard J. Lambert, P.E.
EX PARTE Jermaine HARGRESS

CR-16-0279

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Leon WILCOX, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-0756

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[April 26, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN RE: Robert A. LENTER

NO. 2018-OB-0841

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 15, 2018

ORDER

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel ("ODC") is conducting an investigation into allegations that respondent mishandled his clients' settlement funds, among other professional misconduct. Respondent now seeks to permanently resign from the practice of law in lieu of discipline. The ODC has concurred in respondent's petition.

Having considered the Petition for Permanent Resignation from the Practice of Law filed by Robert A. Lenter, Louisiana Bar Roll number 19952, and the concurrence thereto filed by the ODC,

IT IS ORDERED that the request of Robert A. Lenter for permanent resignation in lieu of discipline be and is hereby granted, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 20.1 and Rule 5.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Robert A. Lenter shall be permanently prohibited from practicing law in Louisiana or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted to the practice of law; shall be permanently prohibited from seeking readmission to the practice of law in this state or in any other jurisdiction in which he is admitted; and shall be permanently prohibited from seeking admission to the practice of law in any jurisdiction.

NEW ORLEANS, LOUISIANA, this *15th* day of *June*, 2018.
#### Mrs. Daisy SCOTT et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COURTESY INNS, INC. d/b/a Heidelberg Hotel, Jackson, Mississippi, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 72-3121

Summary Calendar.*

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Jan. 31, 1973.

*564Jack H. Young, Jr., Melvyn R. Leven-thal, Nausead Stewart, Jackson, Miss., for plaintiffs-appellants.

L. Arnold Pyle, Jackson, Miss. for defendant-appellee.

Before THORNBERRY, DYER and INGRAHAM, Circuit Judges.

*

 Rule 18, 5th Cir.; *see*Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York et al., 5th Cir. 1970, 431 F.2d 409, Part I.

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from an order of the district court granting summary judgment for appellee Heidelberg Hotel and suppressing appellant’s interrogatories. Appellant brought the suit as a class action, alleging employment discrimination under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Appel-lee moved to suppress appellant’s interrogatories, claiming in the most general of terms that the interrogatories as a whole were “oppressive” and “unduly burdensome” and that they sought “immaterial” information. Appellee also moved to dismiss appellant’s suit on the grounds that it was not properly maintainable as a class action and that appellant had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Appellee transmitted to the district judge (but apparently never caused to be formally filed) a memorandum in support of its motion to dismiss, supported by affidavits. Nowhere in these documents, nor at any later stage, did appellee move for summary judgment or request that its motion to dismiss be treated as a motion for summary judgment.

More than sixty days after appellee transmitted its memorandum and affidavits to the district judge, a hearing was held on the motion to dismiss, and the district judge, for the first time, announced that he intended to treat the motion as one for summary judgment. Appellant’s request for additional time to file opposing affidavits was denied on the ground that more than sixty days had elapsed since appellee’s transmittal of its memorandum and affidavits. The district court thereupon granted summary judgment for appellee and suppressed appellant’s interrogatories.

As our opinion in Gutierrez v. El Paso Community Action Program, 5th Cir. 1972, 462 F.2d 121, makes clear, the district judge erred in treating appellee’s motion to dismiss as a motion for summary judgment without first giving appellant the ten days’ notice required by Rule 56, F.R.Civ.P. Furthermore, it was error to base the suppression of appellant’s interrogatories upon appellee’s vague and conclusory objections. Rule 33(a), F.R.Civ.P., clearly provides that each interrogatory must be answered or objected to separately, and objections must be made with specificity. 4A Moore, Federal Practice ¶33.27.

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment below is reversed and remanded for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.

Reversed and remanded.
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1513 

To require that all Special Drawing Rights allocations be authorized by 

Congress in law. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 2, 2021 

Mr. PERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To require that all Special Drawing Rights allocations be 

authorized by Congress in law. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Special Drawing 

5 Rights Oversight Act’’. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1513 IH

1 SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR ALL 

2 ALLOCATIONS OF SPECIAL DRAWING RIGHTS. 

3 Section 6(a) of the Special Drawing Rights Act (22 

4 U.S.C. 286q(a)) is amended by striking ‘‘so that alloca5 tions’’ and all that follows and inserting a period. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 4.1

 



HE/ILl H   SCILNCI '> USANA HEALTH SCIENCES, INC. AUTHORIZED COMMON STOCK:50,000,000   SHARES $.001 PAR VALUE INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF UTAH   Shares of USANA HEALTH SCIENCES,INC.Common Stock transferable on the books of   the Corporation in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of   this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid until   countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. Witness   the facsimile seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly   authorized officers. "" ·-t-S: f' Dated: )> ' c -i D-cz> :Il   N m 0 (J) I Gi 4c :Il m CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 


    




 










The following   abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate,   shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to   applicable laws or regulations: TEN COM TEN ENT JTTEN - as tenants in common   - as tenants by the entireties - as joint tenants with right of survivorship   and not as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT-...................Custodian......................   (Cust) (Minor) under Uniform Gilts to Minors Act ............................   (State) Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above   list. For value received, ___ hereby sell, assign and transfer unto PLEASE   INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTlFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE PLEASE PRINT   OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE   --------------------- - - --------------Shares of the Captial stock   represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute   and appoint _ Attorney to transfer the said stock on the books of the   within-named Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.   Dated, __ SIGNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: s 1ure s Uis -rff N Ys %5 g L s tft AND   CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION   PROGRAM). PURSUANT TO S.E.C.RULE 17Ad·15.
### SERVED: August 19,2013 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC
IN THE MATTER OF NATIONAL POWER CORPORATION FAADOCKETNO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] (Civil PenaltyAction) FDMS NO. 2013-0620



### NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2010-GL-70-0212) has been assignedto Administrative LawJudge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAAHearing Docket, and the otherpersons onthe attach

Attachment

- Service ListSERVICE LIST- BYU.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000 1



### Kate Barber, Complainant's Counsel 

### Attorney, Office ofthe Regional Counsel Great Lakes Region Federal Aviation Administration 2300 East DevonAvenue, AGL-7 Des Plaines, IL 600 18 TEL: 847-294-7862 FAX: 847-294-7498 ONE COPY



### MartinA. Blumenthal, Respondent's Counsel 

### Attorney One Northfield Plaza, Suite 300 Northfield, IL 60093 The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative LawJudge Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E.'(E11-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 202-366-5121 Legal Assistant FAX: 202-366-7536 FDMS No. FAA-2013-0620 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person orby expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
| 1.   | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the annual period ended December 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|   | Date:      | March 30, 2011                                                      |
|--------|------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Signature: | /s/ Mitchell Cox                                                    |
|   | Title:     | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accouting Officer) |