alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Kenneth L. HARRIS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9988.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT 31**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Ron Hooper, certifythat: 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sabine Royalty Trust,for which Southwest Bank acts as Trustee; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact 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 allmaterial respects the financial condition, distributable income and changes in trust corpus of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(c)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)), or for causing such controls and proceduresto be established and maintained, for the registrant and I have: 

a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

b) Designed such internal controlover financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under my supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements forexternal purposes; 

c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report my 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 registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and 

5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors: 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation 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 theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: May 5, 2017
Michael Anthony LEON, petitioner, v. DANAHER CORPORATION, et al.

No. 12-9180.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Arizona, Division Two, denied.
Summary of Non-Employee Director Compensation



 EXHIBIT 10.39 
 SUMMARY OF NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION 
 Beginning in 2007 and until further notice, each of the non-employee
directors of Monogram Biosciences, Inc. shall receive an annual retainer of $20,000, paid in equal quarterly installments, a fee of $2,000 for each Board of Directors meeting attended in person, a fee of $500 for each Board of Directors meeting
attended by phone and a fee of $500 for each committee meeting attended by committee members. In addition, the chair of the Audit Committee will receive an annual retainer of $10,000 and the chair of the Compensation Committee will receive an annual
retainer of $5,000.
Exhibit 31.2
                                                                    ------------
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Paul W. Mobley, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Noble Roman's,
Inc.;

     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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

     4. The registrant'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)) for the registrant 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 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) 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 on such evaluation; and

     (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter (that registrant's forth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

     5. The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant'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 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.


Date:  May 12, 2004

                                          /s/ Paul W. Mobley
                                          -----------------------------------
                                          Paul W. Mobley
                                          Chief Financial Officer
Tony Anthony WHIPPER, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 12-7669.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

*1802Petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District, denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       2,993,802
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,086,180
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,993,802
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      92,378
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,086,180
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,575,169
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,536,056
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                39,113
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.44
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00393-CV

GLORIA MORENO AND GENARO 

MORENO, JR.

APPELLANTS

V.

T-UNIVERSAL CORP. APPELLEE 

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

FROM THE 153RD DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 153-267739-13

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered appellants’ “Motion To Dismiss Appeal.” It is the 

court’s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore, we dismiss the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f).

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Costs of the appeal shall be paid by appellants, for which let execution 

issue. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: MEIER, GABRIEL, and SUDDERTH, JJ. 

DELIVERED: February 5, 2015
Aaron Robert STIMUS, petitioner, v. Michael D. CREWS, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 12-9145.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 138 Received in Senate (RDS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 138

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 13, 2006

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To revise the boundaries of John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 
                   System Jekyll Island Unit GA-06P.

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

SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF CERTAIN JOHN H. CHAFEE COASTAL BARRIER 
              RESOURCES SYSTEM MAP.

    (a) In General.--The map subtitled ``GA-06P'', relating to the John 
H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources System unit designated as Coastal 
Barrier Resources System Jekyll Island Unit GA-06P, that is included in 
the set of maps entitled ``John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier Resources 
System'' and referred to in section 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier 
Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)), is hereby replaced by another map 
relating to the unit entitled ``John H. Chafee Coastal Barrier 
Resources System Jekyll Island Unit GA-06P'' and dated July 10, 2006.
    (b) Availability.--The Secretary of the Interior shall keep the 
replacement map referred to in subsection (a) on file and available for 
inspection in accordance with the provisions of section 4(b) of the 
Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)).

            Passed the House of Representatives September 12, 2006.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Arboleda A. ORTIZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-5437.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Gregory Allen GANT, petitioner, v. NORTH CAROLINA.

No. 12-9002.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 29, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

WAYMO LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;

OTTOMOTTO LLC; and OTTO

TRUCKING LLC,

Defendants. /

No. C 17-00939 WHA

ORDER GRANTING

PERMISSION TO FILE

ADDITIONAL MOTIONS 

IN LIMINE

Each side may file one additional motion in limine by NOVEMBER 13 AT NOON, with

oppositions due by NOVEMBER 20 AT NOON, to be heard at the final pretrial conference on

NOVEMBER 28 AT 8:00 A.M. Each motion or opposition shall not exceed SIX PAGES in length. 

If Waymo wishes to use its one motion in limine on the subject of the due diligence

investigation as described in its précis (Dkt. No. 2040), then it may do so.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 7, 2017. 

WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:17-cv-00939-WHA Document 2178 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32(a)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Zep Inc. (the Corporation) for the year ended August 31, 2009, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certifies 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 Corporation.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|                                               
|/s/ John K. Morgan                             
|John K. Morgan                                 
|Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer
|October 29, 2009                               

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Zep Inc. and
will be retained by Zep Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.]
NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED JUDGMENTS

Vasquez v. Libre by Nexus, Inc., No. 4:17-cv-00755-CW

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

JASON S. RATHOD, pro hac vice

NICHOLAS A. MIGLIACCIO, pro hac vice

MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 

412 H Street, Northeast, Suite 302

Washington District of Columbia 20002

(202) 470-3520 

nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com 

jrathod@classlawdc.com

ANNICK M. PERSINGER, SBN 272996

TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP

1970 Broadway, Suite 1070

Oakland, California 94612

(510) 254-6808

apersinger@tzlegal.com

JESSE NEWMARK, SBN 247488

CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA

3022 International Boulevard, Suite 410

Oakland, California 94601

(510) 437-1863 

jnewmark@centrolegal.org

Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

JUAN QUINTANILLA VASQUEZ, 

GABRIELA PERDOMO ORTIZ, VICTOR 

HUGO CATALAN MOLINA, and KEVIN 

CALDERON, individually and on behalf of all others 

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

LIBRE BY NEXUS, INC. and JOHN DOES 1-

50,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:17-cv-00755-CW

NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED 

JUDGMENTS

Case 4:17-cv-00755-CW Document 248 Filed 01/30/23 Page 1 of 2
NOTICE OF FILING PROPOSED JUDGMENTS

Vasquez v. Libre by Nexus, Inc., No. 4:17-cv-00755-CW

1

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Pursuant to the Court’s January 23, 2023 Order (Dkt. No. 232), Plaintiffs hereby submit

proposed judgments with amounts calculated as of a date certain and that are worded in a manner that 

will permit Plaintiffs to collect the civil contempt sanctions and execute the judgments.

Date: January 30, 2023 MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 

By: /s/ Jason S. Rathod

JASON S. RATHOD, pro hac vice

NICHOLAS A. MIGLIACCIO, pro hac vice

412 H Street, Northeast

Washington District of Columbia 20002

(202) 470-3520 

jrathod@classlawdc.com

nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com 

ANNICK M. PERSINGER, SBN 272996

TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP

1970 Broadway, Suite 1070

Oakland, California 94612

(510) 254-6808

apersinger@tzlegal.com

JESSE NEWMARK, SBN 247488

CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA

3022 International Boulevard, Suite 410

Oakland, California 94601

(510) 437-1863 

jnewmark@centrolegal.org

Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Class

Case 4:17-cv-00755-CW Document 248 Filed 01/30/23 Page 2 of 2
Amendment No. 2 dated January 29, 2001, to the Value Management Plan



 Exhibit 10.33 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 2 
 TO 

CNF TRANSPORTATION INC. 
 VALUE
MANAGEMENT PLAN 
  
 CNF Transportation Inc. (the
“Company”) maintains the Value Management Plan (the Value Management Plan, as heretofore amended, is referred to herein as the “Plan”) to provide for certain long-term incentive compensation awards to be made to eligible
employees. The Company hereby amends the Plan as follows (capitalized terms used herein without definition have the meanings given to those terms in the Plan). 
  

1.    New Section 3.5.    The Plan is hereby amended by adding the following new Section 3.5:

  
 3.5    Special Award Cycles

  
 Notwithstanding any provision thereof to the contrary,
the Committee may elect at any time and from time to time to designate employees to participate in special Award Cycles, which may be periods of one, two or three years. All designations and determinations required under the Plan with respect to
such special Award Cycles (including, without limitation, those under Section 2.03 and 3.1) shall be made prior to or within 90 days after the commencement of the special Award Cycle. 
  
 2.    Effective Date; No Other Amendments.    The effective date of this
Amendment shall be January 29, 2001. Except as expressly amended hereby, the Plan remains in full force and effect. 
  
  

 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

SOUTH BEND DIVISION 

THOMAS LEGG, Jr., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NEW ENGLAND COMPOUNDING 

PHARMACY INC. aka NEW ENGLAND 

COMPOUNDING CENTER, 

AMERIDOSE, LLC, and ALAUNUS 

PHARMACEUTICAL, LLC and BARRY 

CADDEN and LISA CADDEN, and 

GREGORY CONIGLIARO, 

Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CASE NO. 3:12-cv-00844-WCL-CAN

JUDGE WILLIAM C. LEE 

AMERIDOSE, LLC’S CORPORATE 

DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 

Defendant Ameridose, LLC, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1, makes the 

following corporate disclosure: 

Ameridose does not have any parent corporations and no publicly-held corporation owns 

10% or more of Ameridose’s stock. 

Dated this 21st day of February, 2013 

case 3:12-cv-00844-JTM-CAN document 22 filed 02/21/13 page 1 of 3
2 

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Knight S. Anderson 

Knight S. Anderson (17216-53) 

Tucker Ellis LLP 

925 Euclid Avenue 

Suite 1150 

Cleveland, OH 44115-1414 

Tel: 216.592.5000 

Fax: 216.592.5009 

E-mail: knight.anderson@tuckerellis.com 

Attorney for Defendant Ameridose LLC

 

case 3:12-cv-00844-JTM-CAN document 22 filed 02/21/13 page 2 of 3
3 

013260.000012 1592842.1 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing has been filed with the Clerk of the Court 

on February 21, 2013 using the ECF system that sent notification of this filing to all ECFregistered counsel of record via e-mail generated by the Court’s ECF system. 

 /s/Knight S. Anderson 

Attorney for Defendant Ameridose, LLC 

case 3:12-cv-00844-JTM-CAN document 22 filed 02/21/13 page 3 of 3
Stevrick Tavah JACKSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D19-392

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 22, 2019

Stevrick Tavah Jackson, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SALTER, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Gregory A. GOODWINE, Sr., petitioner, v. William LEE, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.

No. 12-9987.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York denied.
Jorge CASTRO, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 12-9135.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, denied.
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 1 of 6
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 2 of 6
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 3 of 6
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 4 of 6
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 5 of 6
case 3:13-cv-00085-RL-CAN document 1 filed 02/11/13 page 6 of 6
Michelle MAUPIN, petitioner, v. HOWARD COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al.

No. 12-1024.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.