alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northeast Area
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        
                Northeast Area Cities

                    Washington, D.C.
                            Newark, Delaware
                            Boston, Massachusetts
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BHNRC)
                            Beltsville, Maryland (BARC)
                            Frederick, Maryland
                            Orono, Maine
                            Geneva, New York
                            Ithaca, New York
                            University Park, Pennsylvania
                            Wyndmoor, Pennsylvania
                            Kearneysville, West Virginia
                            Leetown, West Virginia
                            Burlington, Vermont


                    Civil Rights & EEO Policy StatementsSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Docs Visitor Information





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People

Bike Route 6headline bar RoutesContactsBA Bicycle Policy **From Muirkirk MARC Station to BARC-EAST** (Bldg 177B, Nematology) Contact: Charles Murphy MilesTotalTurnRoad/TrailRemarks00Start LMARC Train Parking lot, Muirkirk Station0.20.2ROld Baltimore Pike (Edmonston Rd.)No shoulder for the first 1.3 miles2.32.5LPowder Mill Rd.0.53R (End)Parking lot, BLDG. 177B


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
Exhibit 10.81

 

FIRST AMENDMENT TO FORESIGHT ENERGY LP LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN


The Foresight Energy LP Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended (this “Amendment”) effective as of February 6, 2015 pursuant to the authorization and direction of the Board of Directors of Foresight Energy GP LLC (the “General Partner”), in its capacity as the general partner of Foresight Energy LP (the “Partnership”).  All capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as in the Plan.

WHEREAS, the General Partner currently sponsors the Plan, pursuant to which awards with respect to the common units of the Partnership may currently be granted to eligible Employees, Consultants and Directors;

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the General Partner (the “Board”) may amend the Plan; and

WHEREAS, Board desires to amend the Plan to permit the issuance of awards with respect to subordinated units of the Partnership.  

NOW, THEREFORE, effective as of the date hereof, the Plan is hereby amended as provided below:

1.The definition of the term “Unit” is hereby removed and replaced with the following definition:

““Unit” means a common unit or a subordinated unit of the Partnership.  In the context of an Award under the Plan, references in the Plan to a “Unit” shall be a reference to either a common unit or a subordinated unit of the Partnership, determined based upon which class of units of the Partnership has been selected by the Committee as being covered by the particular Award.”

2.Section 3(a)(iii) of the Plan is hereby removed and replaced with the following:

“(iii) determine the number and type of Units covered by Awards”

3.The following is hereby added as a new sentence to the end of Section 4(a):

“For the avoidance of doubt, both common units and subordinated units of the Partnership shall count equally for purposes of the limit set forth in this Section 4(a).”

4.Except as expressly modified by this Amendment, the terms of the Plan shall remain in full force and effect and are hereby confirmed and ratified.  

 




 

EXECUTED effective for all purposes as of February 6, 2015.

 

FORESIGHT ENERGY GP LLC

 

By:/s/ Michael J. Beyer

Michael J. Beyer 

President & CEO
#### Marcial Garcia, Appellant, v Superior Crane Rental, Inc., Respondent, et al., Defendant (And a Third-Party Action.)

[944 NYS2d 622]—

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Smith, J.), *1071entered November 17, 2010, as granted the motion of the defendant Superior Crane Rental, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff, who had been working in the tree industry for several years, was an employee of Almstead Tree & Shrub Care Company, LLC (hereinafter Almstead). The defendant City of Yonkers hired Almstead to remove a dead elm tree located on a residential street. Thereafter, Almstead sent a three-person team for the job, including the plaintiff, and subcontracted with the defendant Superior Crane Rental, Inc. (hereinafter Superior Crane), to assist with the removal of the tree. On the day of the accident, the plaintiff positioned a wood chipper, used to chip branches and limbs, directly under the tree to be cut down. While the plaintiff was feeding a branch that had been lowered by the crane into the chipper, another branch fell from the tree and struck him, rendering him a paraplegic. Subsequently, the plaintiff commenced this action against Superior Crane and the City of Yonkers. As relevant here, following depositions, Superior Crane moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. The Supreme Court, inter alia, granted the motion.

Superior Crane met its prima facie burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the sworn deposition testimony of various witnesses, including the crane operator, the plaintiffs coworker, and a nonparty eyewitness to the accident. These witnesses testified that the crane did not touch the tree at any time before the subject branch fell and injured the plaintiff. The affidavit of the plaintiffs expert, submitted in opposition, was speculative and conclusory. Not only did the expert lack the qualifications to opine on crane operation, but he failed to specify how the crane operator acted improperly and, thus, his affidavit was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to Superior Crane’s liability *(see Rosen v Tanning Loft,*16 AD3d 480 [2005]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted Superior Crane’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Rivera, J.E, Hall, Lott and Austin, JJ., concur.
#### Robert J. Ettinger, Appellant, v Kent Karlsson et al., Respondents.

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for libel, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), dated January 4, 1984, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Defendants are attorneys who were retained to represent tenants of an apartment building in conjunction with a proposed cooperative conversion sponsored by an entity of which plaintiff is a principal. Defendants submitted a letter to the State Attorney-General’s Bureau of Real Estate Financing setting forth the basis upon which defendants believed the conversion plan should be rejected. One proffered basis was: “By the sponsor’s own affidavit, two of the purchasers relied upon to obtain that 15% are his attorneys. They have purchased apartments 10A and 9A. It is our belief that not only should these purchasers not be counted toward the 15% because of the business relationship between the sponsor and the attorneys, but because it appears unlikely that these ‘outside’ purchasers actually intend to reside in the units”. Copies of this letter were also mailed to the members of the tenants’ association.

The subject communication is a statement of pure opinion, based upon disclosed facts, and, therefore, is not actionable *(see, Rinaldi v Holt, Rinehart & Winston,*42 NY2d 369, *cert denied*434 US 969). The statement merely offers defendants’ beliefs that the purchasers’ status is questionable in view of their business relationship with the sponsor and that they were “outside” purchasers. Under these circumstances, an action sounding in defamation will not lie *(see, Rinaldi v Holt, Rinehart & Winston, supra; Rand v New York Times Co.,*75 AD2d 417).

We have reviewed plaintiff’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I, Barry J. Susson, Chief Financial Officer of Deb Shops, Inc. (the "Company"),
certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

     (1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly
period ended July 31, 2004 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); 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: September 9, 2004



                                            Barry J. Susson
                                            ---------------
                                            Barry J. Susson
                                            Chief Financial Officer
exhibit_4a-95.htm











Exhibit 4.4.(a).95









The State of Israel


Ministry of Communications


 


General License for Partner Communications Ltd. for the Provision of


Mobile Radio Telephone (MRT) Services using the Cellular Method




 


Amendment No. 79







By virtue of the authority of the Minister of Communications under Article 4 (e) of the Communications Law (Telecommunications and Broadcasts), 5742-1982, that have been delegated to us, by all our other powers under any law and after having considered the arguments of Partner Communications Company Ltd. (hereinafter: “Partner”), we hereby amend the General License for the provision of mobile radio telephone (MRT) services using the cellular method granted to Partner on 7 April 1998,  as follows:








	
Amendment


of Article 65B

	
1.

	
Instead of sub-section 65B.6(c), shall come:

	  
	  	
"

	
(c)

	
By providing a response to subscriber inquiries to choose the necessary specifications on his handset; for cellular handset models that were not marketed by the License, the License will make a reasonable effort to give its subscribers an answer;"







 


(December 1, 2014)







     (sgd)                                           


________________                                                                                                                                


Avi Berger


Director General
**Exhibit 31.1**

I, Scott A. Montgomery, certify that:

1. I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-QSB of National Mercantile Bancorp;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer’sother certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

(a) Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;

 (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the smallbusiness issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this reportany change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscalquarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting; and

5.  The small businessissuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the smallbusiness issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’sboard of directors (or persons 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 small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financialreporting.

 
| Date:  | November 15, 2004 |   | /s/ SCOTT A. MONTGOMERY |
|--------|-------------------|--------|-------------------------|
|   |              |   | Scott A. Montgomery     |
|   |              |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO SECTION 3.18 OF THE POOLING AND SERVICING
                     AGREEMENT DATED AS OF FEBRUARY 21, 2002


                    BANK OF AMERICA MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC.
                MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2002-B


I, Robert S. O'Neill, Senior Vice President of Bank of America, N.A. (the
"Servicer"), the Servicer in connection with Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
Series 2002-B, do hereby certify that (i) a review of the activities of the
Servicer during the preceding calendar year and of its performance under this
Agreement (the "Agreement") has been made under my supervision, (ii) to the best
of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled in all
material aspects its obligations under the Agreement throughout such year.

Certified on this 4th day of March 2003.

                                       BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.


                                       By:
                                          ------------------------------
                                            Name:  Robert S. O'Neill
                                            Title: Senior Vice President


Inv D31
Exhibit 32.1

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

I, Carl F. Fahrenkrug, Chief Executive Officer of Microwave Filter Company,
Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
    December 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
    78m or 78o(d); 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: February 9, 2005                     /s/ Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Carl F. Fahrenkrug
                                                Chief Executive Officer

                                                                   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

I, Richard L. Jones, Chief Financial Officer of Microwave Filter Company, Inc.
(the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended
    December 31, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
    Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
    78m or 78o(d); 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: February 9, 2005                     /s/ Richard L. Jones
                                                Richard L. Jones
                                                Chief Financial Officer
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jessie BERRY, also known as Korey Berry, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-50176

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 19, 2011.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

James Steven Hershberger, Midland, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, STEWART, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Jessie Berry appeals the sentence imposed upon revocation of his supervised release subsequent to his conviction for possession, with intent to distribute, crack cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced Berry to a within-guidelines sentence of seven months’ imprisonment and 29 months’ supervised release. One of the special conditions of supervised release imposed by the district court was six months’ home confinement with, *inter alia,*electronic monitoring.

Berry contends his sentence was greater than necessary to satisfy the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 sentencing factors. Along that line, he asserts: his history on supervised release demonstrated a satisfactory record; and his violations of supervised release were based merely on his failure to report an arrest to his probation officer. Berry does *not*claim procedural error. Thus, the only issue on appeal is the substantive reasonableness of his sentence.

Because Berry did *not*raise his substantive-unreasonableness claim in district court, it is subject only to plain-error review. *E.g., Puckett v. United States,*556 U.S. 129, 129 S.Ct. 1423, 1428-29, 173 L.Ed.2d 266 (2009); *United States v. Peltier,*505 F.3d 389, 391-92 (5th Cir.2007). To establish reversible plain error, Berry must show a clear or obvious error affecting his substantial rights. *E.g., Puckett,*129 S.Ct. at 1429. Even if reversible plain error is shown, our court retains discretion to correct it and will do so only if the error “seriously affects the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings”. *Id.*(citation and internal quotation marks omitted).

Berry concedes that the statutory-maximum term of imprisonment for revocation of supervised release is 24 months. Under 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h) and 21 U.S.C. § 841(b), the applicable statutory-maximum term of post-revocation supervised release is life. *See United, States v. Jackson,*559 F.3d 368, 372 (5th Cir.2009). The sentence imposed by the district court did *not*exceed the applicable statutory máxi-mums. Nor, on this record, is the home-confinement special condition unreasonable. In sum, there is no error. *See, e.g.,*
      *285
      *United States v. Whitelaw,*580 F.3d 256, 265 (5th Cir.2009).

AFFIRMED.

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.
Order entered July 8, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00468-CV

IN THE MATTER OF T.P., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. JD-77361-X

ORDER

We GRANT the June 25, 2013 agreed motion for substitution of counsel. We DIRECT

the Clerk of this Court to substitute Shawn Ismail as counsel for appellant in place of April E. 

Smith.

/s/ CAROLYN WRIGHT

CHIEF JUSTICE