alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 09-9719.

#### Santos Ortiz-Arriaga, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 1084, 130 S. Ct. 2133,

176 L. Ed. 2d 752,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3179.

April 19, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 355 Fed. Appx. 849.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**Certification
      of Periodic Financial Report**


**Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350**








Pursuant
      to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned officers of AHPC Holdings,
      Inc. (the "Company") certifies that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
      Company for the year ended June 30, 2005 fully complies with the requirements
      of
      Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information
      contained in that form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











Date:
      October 14,
      2005                                                                       
      /s/ Alan E.
      Zeffer


Alan
      E.
      Zeffer,


Chief
      Executive Officer











Date:
      October 14,
      2005                                                                       
      /s/ Deborah J.
      Bills


Deborah
      J. Bills,


Chief
      Financial Officer and Secretary





This
      certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, subject
      to
      the knowledge standard contained therein, and not for any other
      purpose.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0878 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2013-SW-033-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Respondent 

 v. 

DAVID AGNELLO, 

 Petitioner 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 2 WM 2015 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 20th day of February, 2015, the Petition for Leave to File Petition 

for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc and the Petition for Leave to Amend are 

DENIED.
ex10-2.htm


Exhibit 10.2


 


AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT












This Amendment to Employment Agreement (“Amendment”) is made by and between Art’s Way Manufacturing Co., Inc. (the “Company”), and Carrie Majeski (“Employee”).







WHEREAS, the Company and Employee are parties to an existing Employment Agreement dated December 20, 2011 with an effective date of December 1, 2011 (“Employment Agreement”);







WHEREAS, the Company and Employee desire to amend Section 1.1 of the Employment Agreement.







NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree that effective as of January 26, 2012, the following amendments shall be made a part of the Employment Agreement:







1.           Section 1.1 of the Employment Agreement is amended by replacing “President, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Financial Officer” with Employee’s updated position and title of “President and Chief Executive Officer.”







The parties acknowledge and agree that such change to Employee’s position and title does not amount to termination of Employee’s employment or the Employment Agreement.







This Amendment shall be attached to and be a part of the Employment Agreement between the Company and Employee.







Except as set forth herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain in full force without modification.









	 	 	ART’S WAY MANUFACTURING CO., INC.	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Date:   February 2, 2012   

	 	
By: 

	/s/ J. Ward McConnell, Jr.	 
	 	 	 	     J. Ward McConnell, Jr.	 
	 	 	Its:	     Chairman of the Board of Directors	 
	 	 	 	 	 





 



	 	 	EMPLOYEE:	 
	 	 	 	 	 
	
Date:    February 2, 2012

	 	
By: 

	/s/ Carrie Majeski  	 
	 	 	 	Carrie Majeski
### FOR PUBLICATION 

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT



#  G EORGE V ILLEGAS ; B OB P OELKER ; M ARCELO O RTA ; D ON D EROSIERS ,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, No. 05-15725

v. D.C. No.



#  CV-01-20720-JW G ILROY G ARLIC F ESTIVAL A SSOCIATION ; D. B ERGMAN , Officer; ORDER C ITY OF G ILROY ,

Defendants-Appellees. 

# 

Filed September 14, 2007
Before: Mary M. Schroeder, Chief Judge.

ORDER
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused regular active judges of this court, it is ordered that this case be reheard bythe en banc court pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The threejudge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to this court or any district court of the Ninth Circuit, except to the extent adopted by the en banc court.

12521PRINTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE—U.S. COURTS BY THOMSON/WEST—SAN FRANCISCO
The summary, which does not constitute a part of the opinion of the court, is copyrighted © 2007 Thomson/West.
**EXHIBIT 23**

 

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ CONSENT**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 33-55179 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-54621of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-54765 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 33-54617 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-20975 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-3,Registration Statement No. 333-23429 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 333-37919 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-3, Registration Statement No. 333-33388 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No.333-38712 of Koger Equity, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated March 5, 2004, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Koger Equity, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2003. 

 

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

 

West Palm Beach, Florida 

March 9, 2004
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 Annual Report of Mercari Communications Group, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report), Tim F. Holderbaum, as Principal Financial Officer of the Company hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that:





(1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Tim F. HolderbaumTim F. HolderbaumChief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer)Date:  August 22, 2011








This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
No. 09-8842.

#### Robert Lindsey, Petitioner v. Walter A. McNeil, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

559 U.S. 1017, 130 S. Ct. 1907,

176 L. Ed. 2d 382,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 2693.

March 22, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied.

Same case below, 19 So. 3d 311.
No. 09-8768.

#### Jesse Robinson, Petitioner v. United States.

559 U.S. 985, 130 S. Ct. 1723,

176 L. Ed. 2d 203,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 1950.

March 1, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 234 Fed. Appx. 77.
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**OFFICER CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Edward O. Irion, certify that:

 

1.         I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Dakota Growers Pasta Company, Inc.;

 

2.         Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.         Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.         The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) and have:

 

a)        Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b)       Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

c)        Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.         The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a)        All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

b)       Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Date: March 17, 2006

 

 
|   | /s/ Edward O. Irion     |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Edward O. Irion         |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
No. 09-10130.

#### Avery West, Petitioner v. United States.

560 U.S. 916, 130 S. Ct. 3302,

176 L. Ed. 2d 1204,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 3976.

May 17, 2010.

Petition for writ of cer-tiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 589 F.3d 936.
Office *of the* Director *of*  National Intelligence
 
 
 HOME GLOBAL TRENDS REPORT FIVE-YEAR REGIONAL OUTLOOKS  | DEEPER LOOKS MEDIA & DOWNLOADS
 Print
			
		
	
	
		
								Menu Show/Hide
INTRODUCTION
Foreword
Key Themes
Executive Summary
The COVID Factor: Expanding Uncertainty
STRUCTURAL FORCES
Structural Forces: Setting the Parameters
Demographics and Human Development
Future Global Health Challenges
Environment
Economics
Technology
EMERGING DYNAMICS
Emerging Dynamics: Societal, State, and International
Societal: Disillusioned, Informed, and Divided
State: Tensions, Turbulence, and Transformation
International: More Contested, Uncertain, and Conflict Prone
The Future of Terrorism: Diverse Actors, Fraying International Efforts
SCENARIOS FOR 2040
Scenarios for 2040: Charting the Future Amid Uncertainty
Renaissance of Democracies
A World Adrift
Competitive Coexistence
Separate Silos
Tragedy and Mobilization
REGIONAL FORECASTS
20-year Projections
Latin America
Europe
Russia and Eurasia
Middle East & North Africa
Sub-Saharan Africa
South Asia
North East Asia
South East Asia
Oceania
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Acknowledgements
**REGIONAL FORECASTS**
NORTH EAST ASIA
*(NORTH EAST ASIA - Click image to enlarge)*
 Officeof the DirectorofNational Intelligence


Contact ODNI

          ODNI Centers
National Counterterrorism CenterNational Counterintelligence and Security CenterNational Counterproliferation and Biosecurity CenterCyber Threat Intelligence Integration CenterForeign Malign Influence Center

           Oversight
Equal Employment OpportunityIC Inspector GeneralIC Diversity Equity Inclusion and AccessibilityCivil Liberties, Privacy, and TransparencyOffice of General CounselMore Offices

          Information
IC IG HotlineNo FEAR ActPrivacy PolicyCustomer ServiceAccessibilityFOIASystem of Record Notices

          Useful Links
For KidsReady.govOpen.govFlu.govPlain Language ActODNI Operating StatusCoronavirus Disease GuidanceAdobe Acrobat Reader
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.60

                               7TH WAVE CONSULTING
                               Heartsoft Agreement



May 17, 2001

Heartsoft
3101 North Hemlock Circle
Broken Arrow, OK  74012

This agreement is made as of this the 17th day of May 2001, by and between
7th Wave Consulting a California based company, having an address at 1047
Gull Avenue, Foster City, CA 94404, and Heartsoft, a Oklahoma corporation,
having an address at 3101 North Hemlock Circle, Broken Arrow, OK 74012.

This agreement will allow for compensation to 7th Wave Consulting for
referring Heartsoft's Internet Safari product to Mega Systems for distribution
into the US and/or International retail sales channel. The terms of this
agreement will be based on 7th Wave consulting introducing and presenting
Heartsoft's Internet Safari product to Mega Systems, working with Heartsoft
during the contract stage and advising Heartsoft on the opportunity.

In consideration for this service, 7th Wave Consulting shall be paid a
one-time fee of         for the introduction to an entity providing the service
of retail distribution. The one-time fee of         is due with-in 30 days of
signing the contract between Heartsoft and Mega Systems.

Accepted by / Date: /s/ Benjamin P. Shell 5/21/01
                    -----------------------------


Accepted by / Date:  /s/ Jerry Rosenbusch 5/21/01
                     ----------------------------
#### Max Ettinger, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Floyd W. Davis, Joined by his Wife, Iva Storm Davis, *Defendants in Error.*

Division B.

Decision Filed March 14, 1928.

*John M. Murrell,*for Plaintiff in Error;

• *Willard & Knight*and *David Kaufman,*for Defendants in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and *487inspected, and the Court being advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and -Buford, J. J., concur.
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 United  Companies  Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the date 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 to his knowledge:


      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.


Date:  May 24, 2004                     By: /s/ Robert M. Carmichael
                                           -----------------------------
                                        Name:    Robert M. Carmichael
                                        Title:   Chief Financial Officer

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document  authentications,  acknowledging,  or otherwise  adopting the signature
that  appears  in typed  form  within the  electronic  version  of this  written
statement  required  by  Section  906,  has been  provided  to United  Companies
Corporation and will be retained by United  Companies  Corporation and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-64,229; TA-W-64,229A] 

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on October 16, 2008 in response to a worker petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Hanesbrands, Inc., Eden, North Carolina (TA-W-64,229) and Hanesbrands, Inc., Forest City, North Carolina (TA-W-64,229A). 

Due to existing certifications issued for Hanesbrands, Inc., Eden, North Carolina (TA-W-61,962K) and Hanesbrands, Inc., Forest City, North Carolina (TA-W-61,962L), these certifications have been terminated. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 9th day of December 2008. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-5177 Filed 3-10-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
HALIFAX COUNTY, Plaintiff, v. EMPIRE FOODS, INC., Defendant.

No. COA18-531

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: March 26, 2019

AFFIRMED.
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 A1 27 0 . J EFFERY J . SAMUELS v . THE STATE.

Aft er en teri n g g u i l t y p l eas i n 2 0 2 1 t o p o s s es s i on o f m a r i ju an a wi t h i n t en t to
d i s t ri b u t e a n d o t her cri m es , J effery J

. Sam u el s fi l ed a m o t io n fo r l eav e t o fi l e an

o u t -o f-t i m e ap peal in M arch 2 0 2 2

. Th e t ri al co urt d i s m is s ed t h e m o t i o n fo r l ack o f ju ri s d i ct i o n , an d Sam

u el s fi l ed t h i s ap p eal

. In Co o k v. S t a t e , t h e Su prem e Co u rt d et erm i n ed t h at a t ri al co u rt lack s au t h o ri t y
t o gran t an o u t

- o f

- t i m e ap peal

. Co o k v. S t a t e ,

_ __ Ga.

_ __ ,

_ _ _ (5 ) (Cas e No

. S2 1 A1 27 0
, d eci d ed M arch 1 5
, 2 0 2 2 ). Sam u el s , t h erefo re, “ h ad n o ri g ht t o fi l e a

m o ti o n fo r an o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal i n th e t ri al co urt ; h i s rem ed y , i f an y , li es i n h ab eas

co rp u s .” Ru t l ed

g e v. S ta t e ,

__

_ Ga

.

_ _ _,

_ _ _ (Cas e No

. S2 1 A1 0 3 6
, d eci d ed M arch
1 5 , 2 0 2 2 ).
Th u s , t h e t ri al co ur t co rrect l y d et erm i n ed t hat i t d i d n ot h av e ju ri s d i ct i o n to

co n si d er Sam

u el s ’ s m o t i o n fo r l eav e t o fi l e an o u t-o f-t i m e ap peal
, an d t h e co urt ’ s

o rd er d is m i s s i ng t h e m o t i o n do es n o t p r e s e n t a c o g ni zab l e b as i s fo r an ap p eal

. See
Hen der s o n v. S t at e , 3 03 Ga. 2 4 1, 2 4 4 (2 ) (8 1 1 SE2 d 3 8 8) (2 0 1 8 ); Br oo ks v. S t a t e , 3 0 1 May 11, 2022Ga. 7 48
, 7 5 2 ( 2 ) ( 8 0 4 S E2 d 1 ) (2 01 7 ). Acco rd i n gl y , t h i s ap p eal i s h ereb y

DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 05/11/2022