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



Exhibit 10.33
 SOUTHWEST GEORGIA FARM CREDIT, ACA
REVOLVING CREDIT NOTE
 $11,000,000
    
    
    
    November 30, 2006Camilla, Georgia
 FIRST UNITED ETHANOL, LLC SOUTHWEST GEORGIA FARM CREDIT, ACA, Lender ELEVEN MILLION and NO/100 DOLLARS ($11,000,000) Loan Credit Facility Agreement
 INTEREST
 Interest Rates
 Initial Rate
 Conversions.
 Interest Payments




---



##### 



PRINCIPAL
 TENDER OF PAYMENT
 NON-CONFORMING PAYMENTS
 PREPAYMENT .
 2




---



##### 



SECURITY FOR THE NOTE
 DEFAULT RATE
 INDEMNIFICATION.
   EVENTS OF DEFAULT
 Payment of Principal
 Payment of Interest and Fees
 3




---



##### 



Default under Reimbursement Documents
 Payment of Other Obligations
 Representation or Warranty
 Liquidation or Dissolution
 Bankruptcy, Etc
 4




---



##### 



Order of Dissolution
 Judgment
 Pension Plan
 Other Instruments
 Certain Covenants
 Other Covenants
 Cross-Defaults
 RIGHTS AND REMEDIES 5
        MISCELLANEOUS
 No Implied Waiver
 Waiver
 Binding Effect
 Notices
 Continuing Enforcement
 6




---



##### 



Waiver of Jury Trial
 Amendment
 Costs, Expenses and Taxes
 7




---



##### 



Governing Law GOVERNING LAW, JURISDICTION, VENUE AND SERVICE
 Assignments and Participations
 Severability
 Usury
 8




---



##### 



9




---



##### 



BORROWER:FIRST UNITED
ETHANOL, LLCBy:
    
    /s/ Murray CampbellName:
    
    Murray CampbellIts:
    
    Chairman
 10
#### State v. Murillo

108,421

08/19/13

Denied. ...

Unpublished
|                                                                  
|------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                  
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                    
|View History: Annual                                              
|View History: Annual                                              
|View History:                                                     
|                                                                  
|South Dakota Imputed Wellhead Value of Marketed Production  (Cost)
|                                                                  
|                                                                  
|South Dakota Imputed Wellhead Value of Marketed Production  (Cost)
|                                                                  

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|1980's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 4,832 
|1990's                                                                                                                            | 1,373  | 988    | 2,607  | 2,781  | 2,492  | 1,991  |        | 1,435  | 4,001  | 0     
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 3,024  | 5,493  | 5,997  | 7,375  | 6,167  | 7,181  | 13,045 | NA    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | NA     | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 7/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 8/30/2024
#### PARK EMPLOYEES’ AND RETIREMENT BOARD EMPLOYEES’ ANNUITY AND BENEFIT FUND OF CHICAGO, derivatively and ON BEHALF OF BIOSCRIP, INC., Plaintiff Below, Appellant, v. Richard M. SMITH, Myron Z. Holubiak, Charlotte W. Collins, Samuel P. Frieder, David R. Hubers, Richard L. Robbins, Stuart A. Samuels, Gordon H. Woodword, Kimberlee C. Seah, Hai V. Tran, Patricia Bogusz, Kohlberg & Co., L.L.C., Kohlberg Management V, L.L.C., Kohlberg Investors V, L.P., Kohlberg Partners V, L.P., Kohlberg TE Investors V, L.P., KOCO Investors V, L.P. and Jefferies LLC, Defendants Below, Appellees, and BioScrip, Inc., Nominal Defendant Below, Appellee.

No. 198, 2017

Supreme Court of Delaware.

Submitted: November 15, 2017

Decided: November 27, 2017

Court Below — Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, C.A. No. 11000-VCG

AFFIRMED.
No. 12-6063.

#### Castleman *v.*United States.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
## RECORD OF CONTACT WITH OUTSIDE PARTY TO **DISCUSS ISSUES RELATED TO INF**  **ORMAL RULEMAKING AGENCY KEEPING**  **RULEMAKING DOCKET** Employ ment and Training Administration/Office of Apprenticeship , Department of Labor **TITLE OF RULE** Apprenticeship Programs; Equal Employ ment Opportunity
, RI N 1205

- AB59 **STAGE OF RULEMAKING** Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Is sued, Comment Period Open

**DATE OF DISCUSSION** November 18, 2015 **NATURE OF DISCUSSION** PHONE X MEETING

__ 

### Party(ies)/Title(s)/Organization(s) Present or Represented **NAME TITLE/ORGANIZATION**  Scott Cheney Senator Murray Staff Dian n e Browning Senator Hatch Staff



### Department of Labor Representatives Participating **NAME TITLE**  Eric Seleznow Deputy Assistant Secretary , Employ ment and Training Administration (ETA) John L add Administrator, Office of Apprenticeship, ETA Franchella Kendall Divisio n Chief, Office of Apprenticeship, ETA Jim Foti Office of Apprenticeship, ETA Daniel Zeitlin Senior Legislative Officer

– Office of Congressional and Intergovernmental Affairs Pronita Gupta Deputy Director, Women’s Bureau Liz Weiss Office of Assistant Secretary for Policy Keir Bickerstaffe Counsel for Interpretation and Advice , Office of the Solicitor/Office of Civil Rights and Labor Management (SOL /CRL M) Jennifer Frey Attorney , SOL /CRLM Tambra Leonard Attorney SOL/CRLM Karin Moll Regulatory Anal ys t, Office of Policy Development and Research, ETA 

### Description of Factual Materials or Information Presented DOL representatives provided a general summary of the NPRM, including reasons for the proposed rule, attempts to modernize and streamline the ex isting rule, and highlighting several other main proposals as set forth in the published rulemaking documents. Outside parties raised the following issues: relationship between proposed reduced regulatory burden and diversification of apprenticeship into new industries; alignment of regulatory

requirements with existing employ er practices; apprenticeship program penetration into diverse, non

- traditional industries; and organizations with whom DOLconsulted in developing the proposed rule. DOL representati ves listened to these issues and concluded the call by urging parties to submit written comments if they wanted their input to be considered in developing the final rule.
#### City of Overland Park v. Brooks

108,961

02/12/14

Denied

Unpublished
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-41629

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JORGE LOPEZ

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:06-CR-497-1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jorge Lopez appeals the sentence imposed after the district court revoked

the term of supervised release he was serving in connection with his 2001

conviction for conspiracy to possess with the intentto distribute and distribution

of marijuana. Lopez argues that the district court’s written judgment of

revocation conflicts with its oral pronouncement of sentence. The Government

agrees.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 2, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 06-41629

2

Lopez pleaded true to violating the terms of his supervised release by

leaving the judicial district without permission, and at both the revocation

hearing and at sentencing, the district court revoked his release based solely on

that violation, not the two other charges alleged in the revocation petition that

Lopez committed new state and federal drug offenses. However, the written

judgment erroneously reflects that Lopez was adjudicated guilty on all of the

allegations in the petition. Additionally, in its oral pronouncement of sentence,

the district court ordered that the 18-month sentence imposed be served

concurrently to any future sentence on the pending drug charges. The written

judgment does not reflect that the 18-month sentence is to be served

concurrently with any future sentence in Lopez’s pending Mississippi drug case.

Therefore, because the language ofthe district court’s oral pronouncement

of sentence conflicts with its written judgment, the case is remanded for the

district court to amend the written judgment to conform to the district court’s

oral pronouncement of sentence. See United States v. Martinez, 250 F.3d 941,

942 (5th Cir. 2001).

REMANDED.
|                                                                                    
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                    
|View History:  Monthly  Annual Download Data (XLS File)                            
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                      
|View History:  Monthly  Annual                                                      
|View History:                                                                       
|                                                                                    
|No chart available.                                                                 
|No chart available.                                                                 
|                                                                                    
|                                                                                    
|District of Columbia Natural Gas Industrial Price  (Dollars per Thousand Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --     | --    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | --     | --     | --     | --     |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
#### COM. v. ORTEGA, R.

3227 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

07/18/2017

CP-13-CR-0000249-2014 (Carbon)

Affirmed
#### COM. v. BYRD, H.

2133 EDA 2016

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

07/14/2017

Reargument Denied 8/14/2017

CP-51-CR-0317152-1975 (Philadelphia)

Affirmed
Certifications Pursuant to Section 906 of the sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
  
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 
  
 Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Telecomunicações Brasileiras S.A.—Telebrás
(the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 
  
 The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the
Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
  

					
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 Date:  July 14, 2003
	 	 	 	 	 	 Minoru Oda
 Chief Executive Officer


  
 A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 







 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 
  
 Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer
of Telecomunicações Brasileiras S.A.—Telebrás (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that: 
  

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2002 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 
  

					
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	

	 Date: July 14, 2003
	 	 	 	 	 	 Vera Lúcia Garcia Caulit
 Chief Financial Officer


  
 A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
##### 



(a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information
relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us
by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;(b)
    
    designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;(c)
    
    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 upon
such evaluation; and(d)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses 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.
 /s/ Charles P. CooleyCharles P. CooleyChief Financial Officer
May 9, 2008
#### State v. Cato-Perry

104,870

08/20/2015

Denied.

50 Kan. App. 2d 623
IV 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 71 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States Postal Service 

should issue a commemorative postage stamp honoring Wilt Chamberlain 

and that the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend 

to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 1, 2011 

Mr. BRADY of Pennsylvania submitted the following concurrent resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States 

Postal Service should issue a commemorative postage 

stamp honoring Wilt Chamberlain and that the Citizens’ 

Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend to the 

Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued. 

Whereas Wilt Chamberlain was a professional NBA basketball player for 14 years, playing for the Philadelphia/San 

Francisco Warriors, the Philadelphia 76ers, and the Los 

Angeles Lakers; 

Whereas in his first NBA season, Wilt Chamberlain was 

named Rookie of the Year, Most Valuable Player in the 

NBA All-Star Game, and Most Valuable Player for the 

regular season; 


tjames on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HCON 71 IH 

Whereas Wilt Chamberlain won a total of 4 regular-season 

Most Valuable Player awards in the NBA (1960, 1966, 

1967, 1968); 

Whereas Wilt Chamberlain holds a number of NBA records, 

including top single-season scoring average, most regular 

season rebounds, most rebounds in a single game, top 

rookie scoring average, and top single season rebounding 

average; and 

Whereas, on March 2, 1962, Wilt Chamberlain became the 

only NBA player to score 100 points in a single game: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that— 

3 (1) the United States Postal Service should 

4 issue a commemorative postage stamp honoring Wilt 

5 Chamberlain; and 

6 (2) the Citizens’ Stamp Advisory Committee 

7 should recommend to the Postmaster General that 

8 such stamp be issued. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
#### Republic Insurance Company, Plaintiff, *v.*Eugen Levy et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Rockland County,

February 28, 1972.

*Donald Tirschwell*for plaintiff. *Klein & Rosenzweig*for defendants.

John C. Marbach, J.

By order of this court dated February 15, 1972, plaintiff was awarded summary judgment pursuant to section 273-a of the Debtor and Creditor Law setting aside a conveyance as fraudulent as to plaintiff. Plaintiff has submitted a proposed judgment for settlement in which it requests attorney’s fees pursuant to section 276-a of the Debtor and Creditor Law.

Section 276-a permits an award of attorney’s fees in an action to set aside a conveyance where such conveyance is found to have been made by the debtor and received by the transferee with actual intent, as distinguished from *intent presumed in law.*

An action under section 273-a is not predicated on a showing of actual intent to defraud. In fact, as specifically stated in the statute, the debtor’s intent is irrelevant to entitlement to relief. Plaintiff’s papers on the motion relied solely on section 273-a and advanced no claim or specific facts for the purpose of establishing actual intent to defraud to support a belated request for attorney’s fees. Accordingly, the request for attorney’s fees is denied.

So ordered.
#### Waymon HARRISON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D16-3484

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed September 19, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Putnam County, Clyde E. Wolfe, Judge.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 80 (Monday, April 27, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 20645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-11019]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Minerals Management Service


Outer Continental Shelf, Western Gulf of Mexico, Oil and Gas 
Lease Sale 171

AGENCY: Minerals Management Service, Interior.

ACTION: Availability of the proposed notice of sale.

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

    Gulf of Mexico Outer Continental Shelf (OCS); Notice of 
Availability of the Proposed Notice of Sale for Proposed Oil and Gas 
Lease Sale 171 in the Western Gulf of Mexico. This Notice of 
Availability is published pursuant to 30 CFR 256.29(c), as a matter of 
information to the public.
    With regard to oil and gas leasing on the OCS, the Secretary of the 
Interior, pursuant to section 19 of the OCS Lands Act, as amended, 
provides the affected States the opportunity to review the proposed 
Notice of Sale. The proposed Notice sets forth the proposed terms and 
conditions of the sale, including minimum bids, royalty rates, and 
rentals.
    The proposed Notice of Sale for proposed Sale 171 may be obtained 
by written request to the Public Information Unit, Gulf of Mexico 
Region, Minerals Management Service, 1201 Elmwood Park Boulevard, New 
Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394, or by telephone at (504) 736-2529.
    The final Notice of Sale will be published in the Federal Register 
at least 30 days prior to the date of bid opening. Bid opening is 
currently scheduled for August 1998.

    Dated: April 20, 1998.
Cynthia Quarterman,
Director, Minerals Management Service.
[FR Doc. 98-11019 Filed 4-24-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-M
#### Mary ZIMMERMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-3848

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 1, 2017.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Manatee County; Susan Maulucci, Judge.

Affirmed.
#### James Russell HUFF, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D16-2989

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 3, 2017

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hills-borough County; Thomas P. Barber, Judge.

Affirmed.