alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit
      32**





**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 Annual Report of Alyst Acquisition Corp. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB for the period from August 16, 2006 (date if inception) to June 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned,
      in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies 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 operation of the Company.





September
                25, 2007
            By:
            /s/
                Dr. William WekselDr.
                William WekselChief
                Executive OfficerSeptember
                25, 2007
            By:
            /s/
                Michael E. WekselMichael
                E. WekselChief
                Operating Officer and Chief Financial
                Officer
#### The Mayor, etc., of New York, Resp’t, v. Wm. F. Ehrsam, App’lt.

Appeal from judgment of the third district court.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Christopher Antonio LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-11940 Non-Argument Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

(August 29, 2017)

Sandra J. Stewart, George L. Beck, Jr., Tommie Brown Hardwick, Curtis Ivy, Jr., U.S. Attorney’s Office, Montgomery, AL, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Before HULL, MARCUS and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Thomas M. Goggans, retained counsel for Christopher Antonio Lewis in this appeal from the denial of Lewis’s 18 U.S.C. § 3682(c)(2) motion for a reduction in sentence, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is *619correct. Because the record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED and the order denying Lewis’s motion is AFFIRMED.
#### UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Terrence Lamar HAWKINS Defendant-Appellant

No. 17-1232

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: July 24, 2017

Filed: August 4, 2017

Lawrence E. Miller, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Missouri, Jefferson City, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Terrence Lamar Hawkins, Pro Se

*463Before COLLOTON, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Terrence Hawkins brings this appeal after the district court1 revoked his supervised release on concurrent federal sentences that he was serving, and imposed concurrent revocation sentences of 10 months in prison and no additional supervised release.

For reversal, Hawkins challenges as unlawful a search during which a police officer found drugs in his pocket. This argument fails because Hawkins did not raise it below, and in any event, he did not allege harassment. See United States v. Charles, 531 F.3d 637, 640 (8th Cir. 2008) (assuming defendant did not waive Fourth Amendment argument by failing to raise it before district court, and holding that exclusionary rule does not apply in revocation of supervised release proceedings absent showing of harassment). Hawkins also argues that his sentence is substantively unreasonable, but this argument fails as well. Reviewing for an abuse of discretion, see United States v. Growden, 663 F.3d 982, 984 (8th Cir. 2011) (per curiam) (standard of review), we conclude that the sentence, which is within the advisory Guidelines revocation range, is not unreasonable, see United States v. Petreikis, 551 F.3d 822, 824 (8th Cir. 2009) (applying presumption of substantive reasonableness to revocation sentence within Guidelines range).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Brian C. Wimes, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
#### Bruce Warren CREAMER, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CITY OF TULARE, a Municipal Corporation and a Common Law City; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-17220

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*599Submitted June 26, 2017*

Filed July 5, 2017

Bruce Warren Creamer, Pro Se

Before: PAEZ, BEA, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

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

MEMORANDUM **

Bruce Warren Creamer appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging various federal and state law violations. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm.

Because Creamer has failed to address on appeal how the district court erred in dismissing his action, Creamer has waived his challenge to the district court’s dismissal for failure to state a claim. *See Smith v. Marsh,*194 F.3d 1045, 1052 (9th Cir. 1999) (“[0]n appeal, arguments not raised by a party in its opening brief are deemed waived.”).

We do not consider arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

We do not consider issues raised by Creamer in his brief that are not supported by argument. *See Acosta-Huerta v. Estelle,*7 F.3d 139, 144 (9th Cir. 1992).

We reject as unsupported by the record Creamer’s contentions of judicial bias.

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6794 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 6794

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the Medicare 
      independence at home medical practice demonstration program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           December 14, 2023

  Mr. Burgess (for himself and Mrs. Dingell) introduced the following 
  bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in 
 addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to extend the Medicare 
      independence at home medical practice demonstration program.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENDING THE MEDICARE INDEPENDENCE AT HOME DEMONSTRATION 
              PROGRAM.

    (a) In General.--Section 1866E(e) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395cc-5(e)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``10-year'' and inserting 
        ``12-year''; and
            (2) by striking ``tenth'' each place such term appears and 
        inserting ``twelfth'' in each such place.
    (b) Report.--Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment 
of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services shall submit to 
Congress a report on the Independence at Home Medical Practice 
Demonstration Program established under section 1866E of the Social 
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395cc-5). Such report shall contain an 
evaluation of--
            (1) the effectiveness of such Program with respect to 
        health outcomes; and
            (2) any barriers to participation in such Program.
                                 <all>
```
Form of Retention Bonus Letter Agreement



 Exhibit 10.6 

 

			
	 March 21, 2012
	  	Personal & Confidential

  

							
	 To:
	 	  
	 		 	
			
	 From:
	 	Emily Lee Kelley, Vice President, Human Resources	 	
			
	 RE:
	 	Retention Bonus 	 	

 I am writing to inform you that, in appreciation for your continued support of Alexza Pharmaceuticals, the company is
offering you a retention bonus. The company is offering this retention bonus because it wants to reward you with additional compensation should certain conditions as specified below be satisfied. 

You will receive a lump sum retention bonus of $             (less applicable withholdings
and deductions) if each of the following conditions are satisfied: 
  

	 	(1)	You sign this memo in the space provided below and return it to me by no later than Friday, March 23, 2012 


 

	 	(3)	You must not resign your employment or be terminated for misconduct or poor performance prior to May 15, 2012 (if the Company terminates your employment for reasons
other than misconduct or poor performance prior to May 15, 2012, and all of the remaining conditions for the retention bonus have been satisfied, you will receive a pro-rated bonus based upon the amount of time you were employed with the Company
between February 17, 2012 and May 15, 2012); and 

  

	 	(4)	You must satisfactorily perform the tasks and responsibilities that are assigned to you through May 15, 2012. 


If the conditions for you to receive the retention bonus are met, the retention bonus would become payable to you on May 15, 2012. 

Please note that your employment remains “at will,” meaning either you or the Company have the right to terminate your employment without prior
notice at any time and for any reason. 
 Please do not hesitate to contact Human Resources should you have any questions about the salary
reduction or retention bonus program. 
 EMPLOYEE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND SIGNATURE: 
 Although I understand that my employment is at-will, and that this memo does not change my at-will status, by signing below I represent that I currently intend to continue employment with the company in
my current position through at least May 15, 2012. I understand that the company is offering the retention bonus described above in reliance upon my representation. 
  

									
	 Employee Signature:
	 	  
	  	Date:
I

RECORD OF EX PARTE CONTACT

AD DOCKET NUMBER:

FAA-2010-9375- 0'270

FAA EMPLOYEE CONTACTED (name, routing symbol):

Christopher Alfano, ANE-171 contacted James Bender of Com air.

DATE AND TIME OF CONTACT:

June 10,2010 at II :00 AM EST

TYPE OF CONTACT (phone call, formal or infonnal meeting, etc.):

Phone Call.

NAMES OF ALL PERSONS INVOLVED IN CONTACT, INCLUDING TITLES AND AFFILIATION:

Mr. James Bender, Compliance Analyst, Comair Inc.

Mr. Christopher Alfano, Aerospace Engineer, ANE-171 , FAA

TOPIC(S) DISCUSSED (Be specific)

Topics discussed were Comair comments presented in the NPRM. It was difficult for the FAA to fully interpret

what the Comair request were. FAA requested Comair clearl~ explain their comments. Comair explained their

three (3) request as:

1) Why is the FAA moving MRM Part 1 items in Pm1 2 of the MRM since it is note structured to do so.

2) If rAA's inlcnt is not to move Part 1 of the MRM into Part 2, then FAA needs to look back at AD 2004-

22-08 comments, I

3) Add a provision to paragraph (1)(1)to allow continuati9n of previously issued Com air AMOCs for

inspection of Bulkhead Checkvalvcs, until the exiting Checkvalvcs are discardsed per the required tasks.

COMMITMENTS MADE BY FAAIDOT PERSONNEL:

FAA will acknowledge via Final Rule.

Were any documents discussed? (X) YES (attach copies or reference) ( ) No

AD 2004-22-08

PREPARED BY: DATE:

THIS FORM IS TO BE PLACED IN THE PUBLIC DOCKET

FOR THE SUBJECT RULEMAKING ACTION.

R"visiun 1 16.1009
KPMG LLP
Chartered Accountants
PO Box 10426 777 Dunsmuir Street
Vancouver BC V7Y 1K3
CanadaTelephone
(604) 691-3000
Fax
(604) 691-3031
Internet
www.kpmg.ca   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM  The Board of Directors Asanko Gold Inc. We consent to the use of our reports, each dated March 7, 2014, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Asanko Gold Inc. included in this Annual Report on Form 40-F. /s/ KPMG LLP Chartered Accountants March 28, 2014 Vancouver, Canada   KPMG LLP is a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG
network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative 
(KPMG International), a Swiss entity. 
KPMG Canada provides services to KPMG LLP.
> ^
UNITE D STATE S DEPARTMEN T O FTRANSPORTATIO N FEDERA LAVIATIO NADMINISTRATIO N

WASHINGTON , D C

Delber t Johnso n d/b/ aTw o Dog s Aviatio n

Complainant ,
Goldsbor o Wayn e Airpor t Authorit y Respondent
. FA A Docke t No
. 16-08-1 1

NOTIC EO FEXTENSIO NO FTIM E • . a •— I t o Pursuan t t o 1 4 CFRSectio n 16.11(a) , th e Directo r doe s hereb y exten dth e dat e tha t th e Director' s initia l determinatio n wil l b e rendered , i nth e abov e reference dcase , t o o no r befor e Septembe r

15 , 2009
. A n extensio n o f

tim e i s essentia l for

afair an dcomplet e hearin g o f th e matte r

befor e th e agency .

Randal l S
. Fiert z Director , Offic e o f

Airport Complianc e an dFiel dOperation s AU G 3 20G 9CERTIFICAT EO FSERVIC E
I HEREB Y CERTIF Y tha t o nAugus t

3 , 2009, 1 cause dt o b e place di nth e Unite d State s mai l (firs t

clas s mail , postag e paid) , atru e cop y o f th e foregoin g documen t

addresse d to : Glen n A
. Barfiel d Pos t Offic e Drawe r

7 Goldsboro , N C 27533-000 7 (919 ) 735-642 0

Counse l for

Complainan t W
. Harrel l Everett , Jr
. Everett , Womble , Lawrenc e & Brown , LL P 50 7 B Nort hSpenc e Avenu e Goldsboro , N C 2753 2 (919 ) 778-670 7 Pabl o O
. Niiesc h Elain e C
. Lippman n Spiege l & McDiarmid , LL P 133 3 Ne w Hampshir e Ave. , N W Washington , D C 2000 5

Counse l for

Responden t Han dDelivere dto : Part 1 6 Airport

Proceeding s Docke t

Keel y Offic e o f Airpor f C Fiel dOperation s plianc e an d
Exhibit
10.37





March 26,
2009





John D.
Oil and Gas Company


8500
Station Street, Suite 345


Mentor,
OH  44060


Attn:
Gregory J. Osborne, President





Dear
Greg:





The
purpose of this letter is to confirm our agreement regarding my commitment to
provide future funds to John D. Oil and Gas Company (the “Company”), if
necessary.  The Company currently has a $9.5 million line of credit
with RBS Citizens, d/b/a Charter One, which is due on August 1, 2009 (the
“Charter One loan”).  The Company has represented to me that it will
use its best efforts to obtain an extension of the Charter One loan or secure
substitute financing either of which will be upon terms and conditions approved
by the Company.  I commit to guaranty up to $9.5 million of such
extended Charter One loan or substitute financing upon reasonable terms and
conditions, if necessary.  In addition, if the Charter One loan is not
renewed and the Company is unable to secure substitute financing, I commit to
loan the Company up to a maximum of $9.5 million to repay the Charter One loan
in full upon reasonable terms and repayment conditions to be negotiated by the
Company and me if and when such loan is made; provided that I will not require
any repayment of the principal of my loan to the Company prior to January 1,
2010; and provided further that there is no material adverse change at the
Company from the date of this letter through the my loan.  I represent
to the Company that I have the financial resources to provide the financing
described in this letter.





Sincerely,/s/ Richard M.
      OsborneRichard
      M. Osborne
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12
 
                    CASE CREDIT CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
 
               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 SIX MONTHS
                                                               ENDED JUNE 30,
                                                               ----------------
                                                                1998     1997
                                                               -------  -------
<S>                                                            <C>      <C>
Net Income.................................................... $    37  $    39
Add:
  Interest expense............................................      60       44
  Amortization of capitalized debt expense....................     --       --
  Portion of rentals representative of interest factor........     --       --
  Income tax expense and other taxes on income................      20       18
  Fixed charges of unconsolidated subsidiaries................     --       --
                                                               -------  -------
    Earnings as defined....................................... $   117  $   101
                                                               =======  =======
Interest expense.............................................. $    60  $    44
Amortization of capitalized debt expense......................     --       --
Portion of rentals representative of interest factor..........     --       --
Fixed charges of unconsolidated subsidiaries..................     --       --
                                                               -------  -------
    Fixed charges as defined.................................. $    60  $    44
                                                               =======  =======
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges............................    1.95x    2.30x
                                                               =======  =======
</TABLE>
```

[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 204 (Thursday, October 22, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Page 64051]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-26864]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Seventh Meeting: RTCA Special Committee (231) Terrain Awareness 
Warning Systems (TAWS)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), U.S. Department of 
Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Notice of Seventh RTCA Special Committee 231 Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of the 
seventh RTCA Special Committee 231 meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held December 8th-10th from 9:00 a.m.-5:00 
p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 450, Washington, DC, 20036, Tel: (202) 330-0654.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The RTCA Secretariat, 1150 18th Street 
NW., Suite 910, Washington, DC 20036, or by telephone at (202) 833-
9339, fax at (202) 833-9434, or Web site at http://www.rtca.org or Hal 
Moses, Program Director, RTCA, Inc., hmoses@rtca.org, (202) 330-0654.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., App.), notice is 
hereby given for a meeting of RTCA Special Committee 231. The agenda 
will include the following:

Tuesday, December 8, 2015

1. Welcome/Introduction
2. Administrative Remarks
3. Agenda Review
4. Summary of Working Group activities
5. Other Business
6. Date and Place of Next Meeting

Wednesday, December 9, 2015

1. Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Session

Thursday, December 10, 2015

1. Continuation of Plenary or Working Group Session

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairman, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Plenary information will be 
provided upon request. Persons wishing to present statements or obtain 
information should contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may present a 
written statement to the committee at any time.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 16, 2015.
Latasha Robinson,
Management & Program Analyst, Next Generation, Enterprise Support 
Services Division, Federal Aviation Administration.
[FR Doc. 2015-26864 Filed 10-21-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
# EUR-Lex - 32001D0728 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32001D0728

**2001/728/EC: Commission Decision of 9 October 2001 amending Decision 92/452/EEC as regards the lists of embryo collection teams and embryo production teams approved in third countries for export of bovine embryos to the Community (Text with EEA relevance) (notified under document number C(2001) 3001) **

*
Official Journal L 273 , 16/10/2001 P. 0024 - 0025 *

Commission Decision

of 9 October 2001

amending Decision 92/452/EEC as regards the lists of embryo collection teams and embryo production teams approved in third countries for export of bovine embryos to the Community

(notified under document number C(2001) 3001)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2001/728/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Directive 89/556/EEC of 25 September 1989 on animal health conditions governing intra-Community trade in and imports from third countries of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species(1), as last amended by Decision 94/113/EC(2), and in particular Article 8 thereof,

Whereas:

(1) The competent veterinary services of New Zealand have forwarded a request for addition to the list, established by Commission Decision 92/452/EEC(3), as last amended by Decision 2001/638/EC(4) of teams officially approved in their territories for the export of embryos of domestic animals of the bovine species to the Community.

(2) Guarantees regarding compliance with the requirements specified in Article 8 of Directive 89/556/EEC have been received by the Commission.

(3) Concerning Canada, a team formerly approved only for collection is to be also approved for production on request of the Canadian authorities.

(4) Decision 92/452/EEC should therefore be amended accordingly.

(5) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Veterinary Committee,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Annex of Decision 92/452/EEC is amended as follows:

1. The following line is added to the lines concerning New Zealand teams:

">TABLE>"

2. The lines concerning the Canadian teams No E 933 is replaced by the following:

">TABLE>"

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 9 October 2001.

For the Commission

David Byrne

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 302, 19.10.1989, p. 1.

(2) OJ L 53, 24.2.1994, p. 23.

(3) OJ L 250, 29.8.1992, p. 40.

(4) OJ L 223, 18.8.2001, p. 24.