alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 15.1**

 

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in RegistrationStatement Numbers: 333-74703, 333-81400, 333-84044, 333-127660, 333-128619, 333-128621, 333-140798, 333-145751, and 333-149577on Form S-8 of our report dated 29 April 2016, relating to the 2015 consolidated financial statements of RBS Holdings N.V. appearingin this Annual Report on Form 20-F of RBS Holdings N.V. for the year ended December 31, 2015.

 

/s/ Deloitte LLP

 

Deloitte LLP 

London, United Kingdom 

29 April 2016
Amendments to Performance Award Plan



 Exhibit 10.22 
  
  
 KORN/FERRY INTERNATIONAL 
  
 AMENDMENTS 
  
 TO 
  
 PERFORMANCE AWARD PLAN 
  
  
 The following sets forth the amendments and modifications to the Korn/Ferry
International Performance Award Plan as of July 14, 2003. Terms used herein and not otherwise defined have the meaning set forth in the Plan. These amendments and modifications have been adopted by the Board and, as applicable, the shareholders of
the Company. 
  
 Subject to stockholder approval, Section 4.3 was amended to read
in its entirety as follows: 
  
 “Limit on Number of
Restricted Shares.     In no event shall more than 700,000 shares of Common Stock covered by the Plan be available for Awards issued (or reissued) under this Plan as time-based Restricted Stock Awards for nominal or no
consideration other than the par value. This limit on Restricted Shares does not apply to shares issued principally for past services, to shares issued in respect of compensation earned but deferred, or to shares issued in respect of
Performance-Based Awards under Section 5.2.” 
  
 Section 8.5 was amended to
read in its entirety as follows: 
  
 “Termination of
Directorship.     If a Non-Employee Director’s services as a member of the Board terminate for any reason, an Option granted pursuant to this Section 8 and then held by the director, to the extent the Option is then
exercisable, will remain exercisable for 60 months after the date of termination or until the expiration of the stated term of the Option, whichever first occurs. Any portion of an Option granted pursuant to this Section 8 that is not exercisable at
the time of the termination of service will terminate upon termination of service.” 
  
 Except as set forth above, the Plan remains in full force and effect.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway,

 Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

January 29, 2010 

0125 

Order 

 

January 29, 2010 

139923 

ALLIANCE OBSTETRICS & 

GYNECOLOGY, P.L.C., 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139923 

 COA: 280125 

Court of Claims: 06-000167-MT 

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the August 4, 2009 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit
      13.2**


**Certification
      pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**





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 EXFO, hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge,
      that:





1.
            The
                annual report of Form 20-F for the year ended August 31, 2006 of
                EXFO
                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 this annual report fairly presents, in all
                material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
                of
                EXFO.








Date:  November
      23, 2006.











/s/ *Pierre
      Plamondon*


Pierre
      Plamondon, CA


Vice-President
      Finance


and
      Chief
      Financial Officer





The
      foregoing certification is being furnished solely 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) and is not being filed as part of the Report
      or
      as separate disclosure document.
W.R.G. v. J.R.V.

2160291

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

July 19, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
III 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 343 

Supporting the designation of September 17, 2023, as ‘‘National Physician 

Suicide Awareness Day’’ to raise awareness of, and promote a national 

discussion about, physician suicide and to reduce the stigma of mental 

health issues. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2023 

Ms. STABENOW (for herself, Mr. KAINE, and Mr. REED) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the designation of September 17, 2023, as ‘‘National Physician Suicide Awareness Day’’ to raise awareness of, and promote a national discussion about, physician suicide and to reduce the stigma of mental health 

issues. 

Whereas physicians work under intense pressure and are exposed to trauma on the job; 

Whereas the risk of suicide within the medical profession is 

among the highest rates of any occupation; 

Whereas each year in the United States roughly 300 to 400 

physicians die by suicide; 

Whereas the suicide rate— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•SRES 343 IS 

(1) among male physicians is 1.41 times higher than 

the general male population; and 

(2) among female physicians is even more pronounced, being 2.27 times higher than the general female 

population; 

Whereas difficult working conditions, burdensome administrative tasks, long hours, grief over losing patients, and 

watching the families of patients suffer add a layer of extreme stress for many frontline workers; 

Whereas mental health and physical health are equally important components of overall health; 

Whereas there are structural barriers in place that discourage 

self-care and mental health help-seeking behaviors among 

physicians; and 

Whereas a day of public awareness and education campaigns 

is held on September 17 each year to shine a light on the 

tragedy of physician suicide: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) supports the goal of National Physician Sui3 cide Awareness Day to bring national attention to 

4 the mental health crisis affecting physicians in the 

5 United States; 

6 (2) dedicates a day of reflection to honor the 

7 memory of physicians who have died by suicide; 

8 (3) recognizes the need for greater research 

9 into understanding and addressing the issues sur10 rounding physician suicide, including the barriers to 

11 treatment, help-seeking behaviors to address burnVerDate Sep 11 2014 23:49 Sep 14, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SR343.IS SR343

kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•SRES 343 IS 

1 out, and mental care options to prevent physician 

2 suicide; and 

3 (4) encourages the President to issue a procla4 mation calling on the people of the United States to 

5 observe National Physician Suicide Awareness Day 

6 with appropriate awareness and educational activi7 ties. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Steven REESE v. ALABAMA HOUSING FINANCE AUTHORITY

2160570

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 13, 2017 Reh. denied November 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**EXHIBIT
      32.2**




CERTIFICATE
      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 OccuLogix, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John Y. Caloz, Chief
      Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
      to
      the best of my 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 result of operations of the
                Company.




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.






/s/
      John Y. Caloz


Name:
      John Y. Caloz


Title:
      Chief Financial Officer


Date:
      August 8, 2005
Marla ROWELL, Doc # T76573, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-1527

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 22, 2019

Affirmed.
Clyde PRICE and His Wife Mary Price v. CHAIN ELECTRIC COMPANY and Entergy Corporation and/or its Affiliate

NO. 2019-00003

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 6, 2019

Denied.

GUIDRY, J., recused.

HUGHES, J., would grant.
1 Alberto Gonzales, who has been appointed to serve as Attorney General of the United States, and Michael Chertoff, who has been appointed to serve as Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, are substituted as respondents pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 43(c). 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 04-1779

___________ Noe Vasquez-Ramirez, * * Petitioner, * * Petition for Review of v. * an Order of the * Board of Immigration Appeals. Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General * of the United States of America; * [UNPUBLISHED] Michael Chertoff, Secretary of * Homeland Security, * * Respondents. 1 *

___________ Submitted: July 7, 2006 Filed: July 17, 2006

___________ Before ARNOLD, BYE, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Noe Vasquez-Ramirez, a citi zen of Mexico, petitions fo r review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) denying his second motion to reopen. Vasquez-Ramirez entered the United States in 1986, and in 1998 he was charged with-2- being removable. He con ceded removability and in N ovember 1999 an Immigration Judge (IJ) denied his applica tion for cancellation of removal. The BIA affirmed the IJ’s decision on October 25, 2002. In January 2003 Vasquez-Ramirez moved to reopen, asserting that his United-States-born children would suffer hardship if he is removed to Mexico, but the BIA denied th e motion. On October 31, 2003, VasquezRamirez again moved the BIA to reopen, this time to allow him to apply for asylum and withholding of removal on the grounds thatone of his United-States-born children suffered from a psychological impairment a nd that his family would have decreased economical and educational opportunities in Mexico. The BIA denied the motion as numerically barred. The BIA also conc luded that Vasquez-Ramirez did not qualify for the asylum-application exception to th e numerical limitation because he failed to establish changed circumstances in Mexico or prima facie eligibility for asylum or withholding of removal.

We conclude that the BIA acted with in its discretion in denying VasquezRamirez’s second motion to reopen. See 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), (c)(3)(ii) (2006) (permitting only one motion to reopen, excep t when alien seeks to apply for asylum or withholding of removal based on changed circumstances in country to which alien is to be removed); Kanyi v. Gonzales , 406 F.3d 1087, 1089 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review). We cannot c onsider Vasquez-Ramirez’s newl y raised argument that the numerical limitation should be waived becau se he received ineffective assistance of counsel. See Alyas v. Gonzales , 419 F.3d 756, 761-62 (8th Cir. 2005).
Accordingly, we deny the petition.

______________________________
Detarsha C. BRADLEY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-5463

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 16, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender; and Barbara J. Busharis, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General; Kaitlin Weiss, Assistant Attorney General; and Tabitha Herrera, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated assault and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, resulting from one criminal episode involving one victim, in which three or four shots were fired. The trial court imposed consecutive minimum-mandatory sentences under section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (10-20-Life); and Appellant challenged that aspect of his sentence on appeal. Pursuant to *Walton v. State* , 208 So.3d 60 (Fla. 2016), and *Williams v. State* , 186 So.3d 989 (Fla. 2016), we remanded for the trial court to exercise its discretion as to whether Appellant's minimum-mandatory sentences should be concurrent or consecutive. *Bradley v. State* , 223 So.3d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017). The trial court re-entered consecutive sentences. After that hearing and while this appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court decided *Miller v. State* , 265 So.3d 457, 2018 WL 4784069 (Fla. Oct. 4, 2018). In that case, the supreme court clarified its post- *Williams* cases as holding that consecutive sentences are permissible for single-episode crimes only when there are either multiple victims or multiple injuries-neither of which was the case here. *Miller,*265 So.3d at 459, 2018 WL 4784069 at *2. We followed that precedent in *Fleming v. State* , 260 So.3d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019), remanding for resentencing with concurrent minimum-mandatory sentences; and we do so again now.

REVERSED and REMANDED for resentencing.

Rowe, Osterhaus, and Kelsey, JJ., concur.
Donald Andrea DAVIS v. STATE

CR-16-0547

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

July 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 82 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 82

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Oversight and 
       Government Reform in the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 31, 2025

Mr. Comer submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Oversight and 
       Government Reform in the One Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Oversight and Government 
Reform (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), 
including the expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out 
of the applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for 
committee salaries and expenses, not more than $32,864,613 for the One 
Hundred Nineteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $15,907,947 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2025, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2026; and
            (2) not more than $16,956,666 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2026, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2027.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
IN RE: Daniel E. BECNEL, III

NO. 2018-B-0848

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 26, 2019

Rehearing denied.

WEIMER, J., would grant.

HUGHES, J., would grant.
Year Ended December 31,2010
    
    2009
    
    2008
    
    2007
    
    2006Earnings (in thousands):Pre-tax income from continuing operations
    
    
    (5,233
    )
    
    
    28,671
    
    
    
    39,652
    
    
    
    27,765
    
    
    
    13,373Fixed Charges
    
    
    17,635
    
    
    
    20,589
    
    
    
    21,466
    
    
    
    26,548
    
    
    
    10,469Total earnings (deficiency)
    
    
    12,402
    
    
    
    49,260
    
    
    
    61,118
    
    
    
    54,313
    
    
    
    23,842Fixed Charges (in thousands):Interest expense
    
    
    10,419
    
    
    
    13,130
    
    
    
    13,417
    
    
    
    15,889
    
    
    
    6,781Amortization of expenses related to indebtedness
    
    
    1,530
    
    
    
    1,273
    
    
    
    2,474
    
    
    
    5,810
    
    
    
    355Interest component of rent expense
    
    
    5,686
    
    
    
    6,186
    
    
    
    5,575
    
    
    
    4,849
    
    
    
    3,333Total Fixed Charges
    
    
    17,635
    
    
    
    20,589
    
    
    
    21,466
    
    
    
    26,548
    
    
    
    10,469Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    0.70
    
    
    
    2.39
    
    
    
    2.85
    
    
    
    2.05
    
    
    
    2.28
# C_2016402EN.01005301.xml

| 31.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/53 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/53

---

Action brought on 1 September 2016 — Shoe Branding Europe v EUIPO — adidas (Device of two parallel stripes on a shoe)

(Case T-629/16)

(2016/C 402/62)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Shoe Branding Europe BVBA (Oudenaarde, Belgium) (represented by: J. Løje, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: adidas (Herzogenaurach, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: position mark (Device of two parallel stripes on a shoe) — EU trade mark No 8 398 141

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 June 2016 in Case R 597/2016-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Distortion of facts. |
| --- | --- |

—

Distortion of facts.

---
**Exhibit32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

**In connection withthe Annual Report of Scheid Vineyards, Inc. (the “Registrant”) on Form 10-KSBfor the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott D. Scheid, theChief Executive Officer and President of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on my knowledge:**

 

**(1)****                                 ****TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and**

 

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

 

 
|   | */s/ Scott D.  Scheid*                 |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Scott D. Scheid                        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer and  President |
|   | March 29, 2004                    |

 

 

***A signed original of this written statementrequired by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging,or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within theelectronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, hasbeen provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.***

 

----
EX PARTE Michael Deon DRAPER

1160860 (CR-15-0646)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

September 15, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
**Exhibit 10.3**

 

**Reimbursementand Indemnification Arrangement**

 

On July 28, 2005, the Board of Directors of the ComstockHomebuilding Companies, Inc. (the “Company”) agreed to reimburse any andall loss of funds that may be incurred by Christopher Clemente, the Chairmanand Chief Executive Officer of the Company and Gregory Benson, a director,President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, in connection with one ofthe Company’s active projects that commenced operations before the Company’sinitial public offering in December 2004. As part of the condition for the extension of an acquisition anddevelopment loan by the project lender, both Messrs. Clemente and Bensonhad to personally guaranty the indebtedness. The Board of Directors resolved that as the guaranties were made in thebest interest of the Company and since the guaranties enabled the project tocommence operations, the Company should reimburse Messrs. Clemente andBenson for any and all funds paid by them in connection with these guaranties.  Furthermore, the Company will also indemnify Messrs. Clementeand Benson against any and all expenses, to the fullest extent permitted bylaw, if either of them become a party or are threatened to be made a party toany legal proceeding relating to these guaranties.

 

----
J.B. v. MADISON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2160508

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

October 6, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.