alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.48



CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT

and

AMENDMENT



WHEREAS, Hewitt Associates LLC (Associates) and FORE Holdings LLC (formerly known as Hewitt Holdings LLC) (FORE)
entered into the attached Services Agreement effective as of June 1, 2002 (the Services Agreement); and



WHEREAS, FORE has assigned the Services Agreement to the FORE Holdings Liquidating Trust (the Trust) effective September 29, 2005; and



WHEREAS, Associates is willing to accept the assignment of
the Services Agreement; and



WHEREAS,
Associates and the Trust wish to amend the Services Agreement;



NOW THEREFORE,



| | 1. | Associates hereby consents to the assignment of the Services Agreement to the Trust.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The Services Agreement is amended as follows. Since the extent of required services is not known, there shall be no minimum annual fee (Section 1.2) or Basic Services (Section 1.1).
Rather, the fee for any services provided by Associates to the Trust shall be based on the actual time spent by Associates employees at their standard billing rates.
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated this 29thday of September, 2005.



|                      |  |                                 |  |     |  |                  
|--------------------- |  | ------------------------------- |  | --- |  | -----------------
|Hewitt Associates LLC |  | FORE Holdings Liquidating Trust
|                      |  |                                 | 
|By:                   |  | /s/: C. Lawrence Connolly, III  |  | By: |  | /s/: Dave L. Hunt
|                      |  | C. Lawrence Connolly, III       |  |     |  | David L. Hunt    
|                      |  | Secretary                       |  |     |  | Trustee
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350 

Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, I, the undersigned President and Chief Executive Officer of Nicholas Financial, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2011 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company. 

/s/Peter L Vosotas 

Peter L. Vosotas 

President and Chief Executive Officer 

Dated: June 14, 2011
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  on Form  10-Q of  Synovics
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarterly period ended January 31,
2007 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Ronald
Howard Lane, Principal 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:

(3)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
         Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(4)      The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
         material respects,  the consolidated financial condition of the Company
         as of the dates presented and consolidated results of operations of the
         Company for the periods presented.

Dated: March 22, 2007


By: /s/ Ronald Howard Lane
    ----------------------------
    Ronald Howard Lane
    Principal Financial Officer



This  certification  has been  furnished  solely  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Synovics  Pharmaceuticals,  Inc.  and will be retained by Synovics
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
# Official Journal C 208/18 A

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 208 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4718 August 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 208

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4718 August 2004

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2004/C 208/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2004/C 208/2 | Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports into the Community of polyester staple fibres originating, inter alia, in the Republic of Korea: modification of the address of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate | 2 |
| 2004/C 208/3 | Information procedure — Technical rules (1) | 3 |
| 2004/C 208/4 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3524 — BARCLAYS PRIVATE EQUITY FRANCE/FIVES-LILLE) (1) | 9 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2004/C 208/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2004/C 208/2

Notice concerning the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of imports into the Community of polyester staple fibres originating, inter alia, in the Republic of Korea: modification of the address of a company subject to an individual anti-dumping duty rate

inter alia

2

2004/C 208/3

Information procedure — Technical rules (1)

3

2004/C 208/4

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case No COMP/M.3524 — BARCLAYS PRIVATE EQUITY FRANCE/FIVES-LILLE) (1)

9

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Filed 4/24/96 TENTH CIRCUIT LARRY A. BRYAN,

Plaintiff - Appellant, No. 95-3235 v. (D.C. No. 95-CV-3223) E. JAY GREENO and JOHN COWLES, Court-Appointed Defense Counsels, (D. Kan.)

Defendants - Appellees.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before PORFILIO, McKAY and KELLY, Circuit Judges. After examining the briefs and the appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Plaintiff Larry A. Bryan, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, brought this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that his court-appointed attorneys provided ineffective2

assistance of counsel in his state court conviction. He also alleges that his attorneys conspired against him with the state. The district court dismissed the action as legally frivolous pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(d) because of Mr. Bryan’s conclusory allegations and because Mr. Bryan had not first invalidated his state court conviction as required by Heck v. Humphrey , 114 S. Ct. 2364 (1994). The court then denied Mr. Bryan leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis. We have reviewed the record and have determined that Mr. Bryan fails to make a sufficient argument on the law or on the facts to warrant granting him leave to appeal in forma pauperis. Thus, Mr. Bryan’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis is denied. The appeal is DISMISSED.

DISMISSED. The mandate shall issue forthwith. Entered for the Court Monroe G. McKay Circuit Judge
# C_2020087EN.01000601.xml

| 16.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 87/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 87/6

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 3 December 2019 — VZ and Others v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-880/19)

(2020/C 87/08)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: VZ and Others

Defendant: Eurowings GmbH

Questions referred

| 1. | Is Article 5(1)(c)(iii) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the re-routing referred to therein which allows the passenger to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure is to be carried out from the same airport of departure as that of the booked flight or could a departure from another airport also be considered? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is Article 5(1)(c)(iii) of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) to be interpreted as meaning that the re-routing referred to therein which allows the passenger to depart no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure is to be carried out from the same airport of departure as that of the booked flight or could a departure from another airport also be considered?

| 2. | In the case where a departure from another airport could also be considered, is it solely decisive whether the departure takes place no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure, irrespective of how far the passenger travels to the airport or is the difference in timing also to be taken into account in connection with the passenger’s journey to the airport? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the case where a departure from another airport could also be considered, is it solely decisive whether the departure takes place no more than one hour before the scheduled time of departure, irrespective of how far the passenger travels to the airport or is the difference in timing also to be taken into account in connection with the passenger’s journey to the airport?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
Exhibit 32

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

906 OF THE SARBAENES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of American Commerce Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for the
year ended February 28, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to such officers knowledge: Section 13(a)



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) of Section 15 (d) of the Securities and 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 as of the dates and for the
periods expressed in the Report.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed below by the following
persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.



|                       |  |                                                                    |              |             
|---------------------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------ | ------------
|Signatures             |  | Title                                                              |              | Date        
|                       |  |                                                                   
|/s/ Robert E. Maxwell  |  | Chairman of the Board & Director                                   |              | June 9, 2006
|Robert E. Maxwell      |  |                                                                    |              |             
|                       |  |                                                                   
|/s/ Daniel L. Hefner   |  | Chief Executive Officer, President & Director                      |              |             
|Daniel L. Hefner       |  |                                                                    |              | June 9, 2006
|                       |  |                                                                   
|/s/ Frank D. Puissegur |  | Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) and Director |              |             
|Frank D. Puissegur     |  |                                                                    | June 9, 2006
(January 3, 1986)

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Vollmer, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a

judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Rohl, J.), rendered June 14, 1983, convicting him of sodomy in the first degree (four counts), after a nonjury trial, and imposing sentence.

Judgment reversed, on the facts, and indictment dismissed. This case is remitted to the County Court, Suffolk County, for the purpose of entering an order in its discretion pursuant to CPL 160.50.

*544On our review of the record, we find that defendant’s guilt was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Mollen, P. J., Gibbons, Thompson and Brown, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT
32.1

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

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of Vascular Solutions, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Howard Root, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company, certify to my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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/ Howard
 Root        
| | Howard
 Root            
| | Chief
 Executive Officer
| | October 22,
 2010       

---
Case: 1:02-cv-06240 Document #: 298 Filed: 10/13/10 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:7007
Case: 1:02-cv-06240 Document #: 298 Filed: 10/13/10 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:7008
Case: 1:02-cv-06240 Document #: 298 Filed: 10/13/10 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:7009
Case: 1:02-cv-06240 Document #: 298 Filed: 10/13/10 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:7010
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET OF ADVANCED GAMING  TECHNOLOGY,  INC. AS OF MARCH 31, 2000 AND THE RELATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS,  AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         397
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    20
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               418
<PP&E>                                         126
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          175
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       125
<OTHER-SE>                                    (510)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   700
<SALES>                                        15
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               99
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             31
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (115)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (115)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0


</TABLE>
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 69 

To amend the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 to exclude 

secondary sales, repair services, and certain vehicles from the ban on 

lead in children’s products, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 25 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 2011 

Mr. TESTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act 

of 2008 to exclude secondary sales, repair services, and 

certain vehicles from the ban on lead in children’s products, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Common Sense in Con5 sumer Product Safety Act of 2011’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 69 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF SECONDARY SALES, REPAIR SERV2 ICES, AND CERTAIN VEHICLES FROM BAN ON 

3 LEAD IN CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS. 

4 (a) EXCLUSION OF SECONDARY SALES AND REPAIR

5 SERVICES.—Subsection (a) of section 101 of the Con6 sumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008 (15 

7 U.S.C. 1278a) is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing: 

9 ‘‘(3) CONSTRUCTION.— 

10 ‘‘(A) SECONDARY SALES.—The sale of a 

11 children’s product described in paragraph (1) 

12 after the first retail sale of that product shall 

13 not be considered an introduction or delivery 

14 for introduction into interstate commerce under 

15 section 4(a) of the Federal Hazardous Sub16 stances Act (15 U.S.C. 1263(a)) of such prod17 uct. 

18 ‘‘(B) REPAIR SERVICES.—The repair of a 

19 children’s product described in paragraph (1) 

20 shall not be considered an introduction or deliv21 ery for introduction into interstate commerce 

22 under such section 4(a) of such product.’’. 

23 (b) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN VEHICLES.—Subsection 

24 (b) of such section 101(b) is amended— 

25 (1) by redesignating paragraph (5) as para26 graph (6); and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 69 IS

1 (2) by inserting after paragraph (4) the fol2 lowing: 

3 ‘‘(5) CERTAIN VEHICLES.—A vehicle designed 

4 or intended primarily for children 6 years of age or 

5 older shall not be considered a children’s product for 

6 purposes of the prohibition in subsection (a). In de7 termining whether a vehicle is primarily intended for 

8 a child 6 years of age or older, the factors specified 

9 in section 3(a)(2) of the Consumer Product Safety 

10 Act (15 U.S.C. 2052(a)(2)) shall be considered ex11 cept that such section shall be applied by sub12 stituting ‘6 years of age or older’ for ‘12 years of 

13 age or younger’ each place that term appears.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Robert Portman, certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of PacificHealth
Laboratories, 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 (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 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: March 29, 2006                By: /s/ Robert Portman
                                        ------------------
                                    Robert Portman, Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)