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

| 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. |
|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:              May 15,      2009                                    |   | By:  /s/ Stephen L.      Price                                                |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |   | Stephen      L. Price, President, Principal Executive Officer                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      |
|                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |   | And      Chairman of the Board ofDirectors                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |

----
**RB** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 1 9 - 0 121 CITY OF WHITEFISH ,

P la intiff and Appell ee , v. WILLIAM PURDY KLINK III ,

Defen d ant and Appell an

t . **ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 3 0 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including Septe mber 24 , 2020 , within which to prepare, serve, and file the State’s response .

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 20 2020

08/20/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0121
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 542

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain land in Washoe 

County, Nevada, to the Board of Regents of the University and Community College System of Nevada. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 2, 2005

Mr. GIBBONS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to convey certain 

land in Washoe County, Nevada, to the Board of Regents 

of the University and Community College System of Nevada.

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 ‘‘Dandini Research Park 

5 Conveyance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 
2 

•HR 542 IH 

1 (1) BOARD OF REGENTS.—The term ‘‘Board of 

2 Regents’’ means the Board of Regents of the Uni3 versity and Community College System of Nevada. 

4 (2) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

5 the Secretary of the Interior. 

6 SEC. 3. CONVEYANCE TO THE UNIVERSITY AND COMMU7 NITY COLLEGE SYSTEM OF NEVADA. 

8 (a) CONVEYANCE.— 

9 (1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall convey 

10 to the Board of Regents, without consideration, all 

11 right, title, and interest of the United States in and 

12 to the approximately 467 acres of land located in 

13 Washoe County, Nevada, patented to the University 

14 of Nevada under the Act of June 14, 1926 (com15 monly known as the ‘‘Recreation and Public Pur16 poses Act’’) (43 U.S.C. 869 et seq.), and described 

17 in paragraph (2). 

18 (2) DESCRIPTION OF LAND.—The land referred 

19 to in paragraph (1) is— 

20 (A) the parcel of land consisting of ap21 proximately 309.11 acres and more particularly 

22 described as T. 20 N., R. 19 E., Sec. 25, lots 

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 11, SE 1⁄4 NW 1⁄4, NE 1 23 ⁄4

SW 1 24 ⁄4, Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada; and 
3 

•HR 542 IH 

1 (B) the parcel of land consisting of ap2 proximately 158.22 acres and more particularly 

3 described as T. 20 N., R. 19 E., Sec. 25, lots 

6 and 7, SW 1⁄4 NE 1⁄4, NW 1⁄4 SE 1 4 ⁄4, Mount 

5 Diablo Meridian, Nevada. 

6 (b) COSTS.—The Board of Regents shall pay to the 

7 United States an amount equal to the costs of the Sec8 retary associated with the conveyance under subsection 

9 (a)(1). 

10 (c) CONDITIONS.—If the Board of Regents sells any 

11 portion of the land conveyed to the Board of Regents 

12 under subsection (a)(1)— 

13 (1) the amount of consideration for the sale 

14 shall reflect fair market value, as determined by an 

15 appraisal; and 

16 (2) the Board of Regents shall pay to the Sec17 retary an amount equal to the net proceeds of the 

18 sale, for use by the Director of the Bureau of Land 

19 Management in the State of Nevada, without further 

20 appropriation. 

Æ
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 379 

Expressing support for the designation of May 6, 2023, as ‘‘National Sport 

Brain Health Day’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2023 

Mr. PASCRELL (for himself and Mr. BACON) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of May 6, 2023, 

as ‘‘National Sport Brain Health Day’’. 

Whereas youth sports and recreational activities contribute to 

over 21 percent of all traumatic brain injuries; 

Whereas athletes of all ages and levels deserve to be educated 

and to become aware of the importance of brain health; 

Whereas the seriousness of traumatic brain injury in athletes 

should not be minimized; 

Whereas traumatic brain injury can affect physical, mental, 

and social health, and a greater awareness and understanding of proper diagnosis and management of concussions is critical to improved outcomes; and 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 379 IH 

Whereas the House of Representatives can raise awareness 

about traumatic brain injury among the medical community and the public: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) expresses support for the designation of 

3 ‘‘National Sport Brain Health Day’’; 

4 (2) recognizes that athletes are at significant 

5 risk for traumatic brain injury; 

6 (3) commends the Sports Neuropsychology So7 ciety for their dedication to raising awareness about 

8 traumatic brain injury and treatment in athletes; 

9 (4) encourages Federal, State, and local policy10 makers to work together— 

11 (A) to raise awareness about the effects of 

12 traumatic brain injury; and 

13 (B) to improve the understanding of prop14 er diagnosis and management of brain injury in 

15 athletes; and 

16 (5) encourages further research and prevention 

17 efforts to ensure that fewer athletes experience the 

18 most adverse effects of traumatic brain injury. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. § 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO§ 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q of Techwell, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly periodended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), Fumihiro Kozato, Chief Executive Officer of theCompany hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of hisknowledge, that:

(1)   The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ Fumihiro  Kozato    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Fumihiro Kozato         |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   | August 11, 2006         |

 

----
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-65,374]

Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, an investigation was initiated on February 25, 2009, in response to a worker petition filed on behalf of workers at Rohm and Haas Company, LLC, West Alexandria, Ohio.

The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

Signed at Washington, DC this 13th day of March 2009.

Elliott S. Kushner,

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. E9-6531 Filed 3-24-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
<PAGE>


                                                      Exhibit 32.2


                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
           AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



           I, Joseph A. Orlando, as Treasurer of Leucadia National Corporation -
Arizona (the "Company") certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

         (1) the accompanying Form 10-Q report for the period ending March 31,
2004 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report")
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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





Dated:  May 3, 2004

                               By: /s/ Joseph A. Orlando
                                  ---------------------------------------
                                  Joseph A. Orlando
                                  Treasurer
                                  (Principal Financial Officer)
Amendment to Executive Severance Agreement between the Company and Amar Singh



 Exhibit 10.2 
 AMENDMENT TO 
 EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFIT AGREEMENT 
 This AMENDMENT TO EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE BENEFITS AGREEMENT
(this “Amendment”) is entered into this 17 day of December, 2007 (the “Effective Date”), between AMAR SINGH (“Executive”) and NOVACEA,
INC. (the “Company”) and amends, to the extent provided herein, that certain Executive Severance Benefits Agreement entered into between Executive and the Company as of April 13, 2006 (the
“Agreement”). This Amendment to the Agreement, together with the Agreement, constitutes the entire Agreement as amended through the Effective Date. 
 1. Change of Control Severance Benefits. Effective as of the Effective Date, Section 3.2(a) of the Agreement is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 
 “(a) Base Salary. The Company shall pay to Executive an amount equal to twelve (12) months’ Base Salary. Subject to Section 3.3
hereof, the severance benefit contemplated by this Section 3.2(a) shall be paid in cash in a lump sum within thirty (30) days following the Covered Termination and shall be subject to all required tax and other applicable
withholding.” 
 2. No Other Changes. Except as provided in this Amendment, the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer and Executive has executed this
Amendment as of the Effective Date. 
  

									
	NOVACEA, INC.	 		 	AMAR SINGH
					
	By:	 	/s/ John P. Walker	 		 		 	/s/ Amar Singh
					
	Name:	 	John P. Walker	 		 		 	
					
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
# Enclosure IV

ARB Resolution
CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
 
 I, , certify that:
 
  
 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.  The company's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have:
 
 (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 company, 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 reasonable 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 company's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
 
 (d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company's internal control over financial reporting; and
 
 5.  The company's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company's auditors and the audit committee of the company's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (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 company'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 company's internal control over financial reporting.
 
  
 /s/ Stamatis Tsantanis
Amendment No. 1 to the Amended and Restated Deferred Compensation Plan



 Exhibit 10.2.1 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
 TO THE 
 UNIFIED WESTERN GROCERS, INC. 
 DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN 
 Unified Western Grocers, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby amends the above-named plan (the “Plan”), effective as of December 31,
2004, as follows: 
 The “Purpose” section of the Plan is amended and restated to read as follows: 
 “The purpose of this Plan is to provide specified benefits to a select group of management and highly compensated Employees who contribute
materially to the continued growth, development and future business success of Unified Western Grocers, Inc., formerly known as Certified Grocers of California, Ltd. and its subsidiaries, if any, that sponsor this Plan. This Plan shall be unfunded
for tax purposes and for purposes of Title I of ERISA. This Plan combines, amends and restates each of the Certified Grocers of California, Ltd. Employees’ Supplemental Deferred Compensation Plan as amended as of September 3, 1989, and the
Certified Grocers of California, Ltd. Employees’ Excess Benefit Plan, Certified Grocers of California, Ltd. amended and restated deferred compensation plan as amended as of March 24, 2000. The Company froze this Plan effective as of
December 31, 2004, and established a new plan, the Unified Western Grocers, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan II (‘Plan II’), effective January 1, 2005. The Plan shall not be subject to Section 409A of the Code. Any amounts
deferred after December 31, 2004 shall be credited to Plan II.” 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company, by its duly authorized
officers, have executed this Amendment effective as of December 31, 2004. 
  

									
		 		 	UNIFIED WESTERN GROCERS, INC
				
	Dated: October 19, 2007	 		 	By:	 	/s/ Robert M. Ling Jr.
		 		 		 		 	Robert M. Ling, Jr.
		 		 		 		 	Executive Vice President & General Counsel
				
	Dated: October 19, 2007	 		 	By:	 	/s/ Richard J. Martin
		 		 		 		 	Richard J. Martin
		 		 		 		 	Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer
CHARLESTON.

#### Silas Hardin *v.*O. B. Bobbitt *Municipal Judge, etc.*

(No. 5511)

Submitted April 12, 1927.

Decided April 19, 1927.

*Prohibition*— Prohibition *Can Only Operate on Pending Suit, and Can Not Be Used to Prevent Institution of Action.*

The writ of prohibition can only operate on a pending suit, and can not be used to prevent the institution of an action.

(Prohibition, 32 Cyc. p. 602.)

(Note: Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. — Cyc. Not part of syllabi.)

Original application by Silas Hardin for a writ of prohibition to be directed to O. B. Bobbitt, Municipal Judge of the City of Charleston.

*Bxile heretofore awarded dismissed.*

*F. A. Mc&rew,*for petitioner.

Woods, Judge:

A writ of prohibition is sought by Silas Hardin, owner and operator of a line of taxicabs in the City of Charleston, prohibiting O. B. Bobbitt, municipal judge of said City, from proceeding to prosecute or penalize petitioner and his nine operators for their non-compliance with an alleged city ordinance fixing taxi fares, requiring the installation and use of taxi-meters, etc.

While the petition upon which the rule issued contains a general allegation to the effect that the alleged ordinance was improperly passed, and that the same was unconstitutional, it does not attempt to advise the Court wherein its passage was faulty, or wherein the ordinance was unconstitutional. After *446reciting the fact that one of petitioner’s operators has been fined, it further alleges that said judge will continue “to usurp and abuse his power”, and ends with a prayer asking that said judge be prohibited “from proceeding to prosecute or penalize petitioner and his nine operators under the said alleged ordinance.”

Petitioner does not seek to restrain the collection of the fine already imposed, but seeks only to prohibit the municipal judge from assuming jurisdiction in case other breaches may be brought before him. This Court, in *Halderman*v. *Davis,*28 *W.*Va. 324, laid down the principle that prohibition can only operate to restrain a pending action or proceeding and can never be used to prevent the institution of an action. This was again announced in the case of *Darnell*v. *Vandine,*64 W. Va. 53. Since the petition does not allege that there is actually any proceeding pending before the municipal judge, the rule heretofore awarded will be dismissed as having been improvidently awarded.

*Buie heretofore awarded dismissed.*