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
 Emerging Pests and Pathogens Research: Ithaca, NY
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Research Units
                        Robert W. Holley Center for Agriculture & Health
                                    Plant, Soil and Nutrition ResearchSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Northeast Area Ithaca, New York Robert W. Holley Center for Agriculture & Health Emerging Pests and Pathogens Research People & Locations







Micheal Matthew Wheeler
                        Emerging Pests and Pathogens Research

                        




                        
                        Biological Science Lab Technician
                        Phone: (607) 255-1274
                        
                        
                        Fax: (607) 255-1132(Employee information on this page comes from the REE Directory. Please contact your front office staff to update the REE Directory.)


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 32.2

Certification

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)

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 Entrust, Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2007 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                       |  |        |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: November 7, 2007 |  |        |  | /s/ David J. Wagner    
|                       |  | Name:  |  | David J. Wagner        
|                       |  | Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer
Case 10-01254 Doc 30 Filed 06/06/12 Entered 06/06/12 08:29:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
Case 10-01254 Doc 30 Filed 06/06/12 Entered 06/06/12 08:29:56 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 24.1


                                POWER OF ATTORNEY



         Know All Persons By These  Presents,  that the  undersigned,  Dennis T.
Mitchell,  whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Danny R. Gibbs
and Tony G. Gibbs, or either of them, his attorneys-in-fact,  for such person in
any and all  capacities,  to sign the  Annual  Report  on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 1996, of Gibbs Construction, Inc., any amendments thereto and
to file the same,  with  exhibits  thereto,  and other  documents in  connection
therewith,  with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,  hereby  ratifying and
confirming  all  that  either  of  said  attorneys-in-fact,   or  substitute  or
substitutes, may do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.



/s/ Dennis T. Mitchell
Dennis T. Mitchell


Dated: March 25, 1997


<PAGE>
#### Maria Moundrakis, Respondent, v John Dellis, Appellant.

[947 NYS2d 575]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for assault, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Strauss, J.), dated July 19, 2011, as granted the plaintiff’s motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b to extend the time to serve the defendant with a summons and complaint.

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

A motion pursuant to CPLR 306-b to extend the time for service of a summons and complaint may be granted upon “good cause shown or in the interest of justice” *(see Leader v Maroney,*
      *1027
      *Ponzini & Spencer,*97 NY2d 95, 104-105 [2001]). The plaintiff failed to demonstrate that she exercised reasonably diligent efforts in attempting to effect proper service of process upon the defendant and, thus, did not establish “good cause” (CPLR 306-b; *see Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer,*97 NY2d at 104; *Bumpus v New York City Tr. Auth.,*66 AD3d 26, 32 [2009]; *Kazimierski v New York Univ.,*18 AD3d 820 [2005]; *Busler v Corbett,*259 AD2d 13, 15 [1999]). Nevertheless, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in granting the plaintiffs motion “in the interest of justice” (CPLR 306-b). In deciding whether to grant an extension of time to serve a summons and complaint in the interest of justice, “the court may consider diligence, or lack thereof, along with any other relevant factor in making its determination, including expiration of the Statute of Limitations, the [potentially] meritorious nature of the cause of action, the length of delay in service, the promptness of a plaintiffs request for the extension of time, and prejudice to defendant” *(Leader v Maroney, Ponzini & Spencer,*97 NY2d at 105-106; *see Thompson v City of New York,*89 AD3d 1011, 1012 [2011]; *Bumpus v New York City Tr. Auth.,*66 AD3d at 32). Here, the plaintiff moved promptly for an extension after the defendant challenged the service on the ground that it was defective *(see DiBuono v Abbey, LLC,*71 AD3d 720 [2010]; *Bumpus v New York City Tr. Auth.,*66 AD3d at 37). Furthermore, the statute of limitations had expired at the time the plaintiff made her motion, there was evidence of a potentially meritorious cause of action, and there was no demonstrable prejudice to the defendant *(see Thompson v City of New York,*89 AD3d at 1012; *DiBuono v Abbey, LLC,*71 AD3d 720 [2010]; *Rosenzweig v 600 N. St., LLC,*35 AD3d 705, 706 [2006]). Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Hall, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

DANIEL RAMON RAMIREZ,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

ROSANNE CAMPBELL,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 07-15798

D.C. No. 06-cv-01257-FCD

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Frank C. Damrell, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 25, 2010** 

Before: CANBY, THOMAS, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges. 

California state prisoner Daniel Ramon Ramirez appeals pro se from the

district court’s judgment dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 habeas petition as

untimely. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253, and we affirm.

FILED

JUN 18 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-15798

Ramirez contends the district court erred by dismissing his habeas petition

because he is entitled to tolling during the time that he diligently sought habeas

relief in state courts. This contention fails because the state court denied Ramirez’s

first habeas petition as untimely and his other state habeas petitions were filed after

the federal habeas statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 2241(d)(1) had already

expired. See White v. Martel, 601 F.3d 882, 883-84 (9th Cir. 2010) (per curiam);

see also Green v. White, 223 F.3d 1001, 1003 (9th Cir. 2000) (petitioner not

entitled to tolling for state petitions filed after federal time limitation has run).

To the extent Ramirez contends he is entitled to equitable tolling because he

is not English-proficient, this contention fails. See Mendoza v. Carey, 449 F.3d

1065, 1070 (9th Cir. 2006) (petitioner who demonstrates proficiency in English or

who has the assistance of a translator is barred from equitable relief).

AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Arnold Randolph, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dubin, J.), rendered June 16, 1983, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (two counts), criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree (two counts), and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

The determination of the jury on issues of credibility is to be accorded the greatest weight on appeal *(see, People v Malizia,*62 NY2d 755, 757, *cert denied*— US —, 105 S Ct 327; *People v Parks,*41 NY2d 36, 47). We see no reason to disturb its resolution of those issues in the case at bar, especially since the record does not support defendant’s contention that the testimony of the prosecution witnesses was incredible as a matter of law. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the People *(see, People v Malizia, supra,*at p 757; *People v Kennedy,*47 NY2d 196), we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to prove defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Niehoff and Hooper, JJ., concur.
Case: 1:03-cv-03381 Document #: 10 Filed: 04/19/04 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:40
Case: 1:03-cv-03381 Document #: 10 Filed: 04/19/04 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:41
EX-10.22





 Exhibit 10.22 

EXHIBIT C 

AMENDMENT TO LEASE 

THIS AMENDMENT TO LEASE (“Amendment”) is made and entered into effective as of 1/24/2020, by and between TALLWOOD
FOREST, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY (“Landlord”), and HIPPO ANALYTICS INC., a Delaware corporation (“Tenant”). 

R E C I T A L S: 

A.    Landlord and Tenant entered into that certain Lease dated as of June 14, 2019 (the “Lease”)
pursuant to which Landlord leased to Tenant and Tenant leased from Landlord certain “Premises”, as described in the Lease, in that certain Building located at 150 Forest Avenue, Palo Alto, CA 94301. 

B.    Except as otherwise set forth herein, all capitalized terms used in this Amendment shall have the same meaning as
such terms have in the Lease. 
 C.    Landlord and Tenant desire to amend the Lease to confirm the Commencement Date
and the Expiration Date of the Lease Term, as hereinafter provided. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and the
mutual covenants contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

1.    Confirmation of Dates. The parties hereby confirm that the Lease Term commenced as of July 15, 2019 (the
“Commencement Date”) for a term of 85 months ending on August 14, 2026 (unless sooner terminated as provided in the Lease). 

2.    No Further Modification. Except as set forth in this Amendment, all of the terms and provisions of the Lease
shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. 












 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment to Lease has been executed as of the day and year first
above written. 
  

			
	“Landlord”:
	
	 TALLWOOD FOREST, LLC, a
 California
limited liability company



 
			
		
	By:	 	 Desi Banatao

	Name:	 	 Desi Banatao

	Its:	 	 President





			
	
	“Tenant”:
	
	 HIPPO ANALYTICS INC.,
 a Delaware
corporation



 
			
		
	By:	 	 Assaf Wand

	Name:	 	 Assaf Wand

	Its:	 	 CFO
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7154

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

HYSEN SHERIFI,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (7:12-cr-00020-BR-1; 7:18-cv-00191-

BR)

Submitted: January 28, 2020 Decided: February 19, 2020

Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Hysen Sherifi, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Hysen Sherifi seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his

28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2018) motion. See Whiteside v. United States, 775 F.3d 180, 182-83 

(4th Cir. 2014) (en banc) (explaining that § 2255 motions are subject to one-year statute of 

limitations, running from latest of four commencement dates enumerated in 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2255(f)). The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate 

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2018). A certificate of appealability will not 

issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(2) (2018). When, as here, the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, 

the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and 

that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. 

Thaler, 565 U.S. 134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)).

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sherifi has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Sherifi’s motion for a certificate of 

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
# Official Journal L 245/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 245 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6412 July 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 245

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6412 July 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1135 of 9 July 2021 establishing budgetary ceilings for 2021 applicable to certain direct support schemes provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1135 of 9 July 2021 establishing budgetary ceilings for 2021 applicable to certain direct support schemes provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
# Official Journal C 331/2023

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 331 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6620 September 2023 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 331

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6620 September 2023

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 331/01 | Euro exchange rates – 19 September 2023 | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2023/C 331/01

Euro exchange rates – 19 September 2023

1

---

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | OTHER ACTS |
| | European Commission |
| 2023/C 331/02 | Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector, as referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33 | 2 |

V   Announcements

OTHER ACTS

European Commission

2023/C 331/02

Publication of a communication of approval of a standard amendment to a product specification for a name in the wine sector, as referred to in Article 17(2) and (3) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/33

2

---

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

EN
#### Matthew MISCZAK, Robert Timpone, and Michelle Timpone, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. CHASE HOME FINANCE, L.L.C., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 11-10187

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Sept. 12, 2011.

Michael Gray, Esq., Mike Gray Law Firm, Arlington, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Marcie Lynn Schout, William Lance Lewis, Esq., Quilling, Selander, Lownds, Winslett & Moser, P.C., Dallas, TX, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GARZA, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Appellants Robert and Michelle Tim-pone executed a Note and Deed of Trust with American Western Mortgage Company, and Appellant Matthew Misczak has acquired the property subject to the security interest. The appellants brought suit in state court against Appellee Chase Home Finance, L.L.C. seeking damages, injunctive relief, and a declaratory judgment for fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. After removal to federal court, the district court granted Appellee’s motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Appellants confíne their appeal to the district court’s dismissal of their claims for declaratory relief. Consequently, the appellants waive all other issues. *See Hughes v. Johnson,*191 F.3d 607, 613 (5th Cir.1999).

A federal declaratory judgment action requires an actual controversy, not one that is “hypothetical, conjectural, conditional, or based upon the possibility of a factual situation that may never develop.” *Rowan Cos., Inc. v. Griffin,*876 F.2d 26, 28 (5th Cir.1989). “Our decisions have required that the dispute be definite and concrete, touching the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests; and *36that it be real and substantial....” *Med-Immune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc.,*549 U.S. 118, 127, 127 S.Ct. 764, 166 L.Ed.2d 604 (2007) (internal quotations omitted). Appellants seek declaratory relief concerning Appellee’s ownership, possession, and entitlement to enforce the Note. However, they have alleged no facts that call into question Appellee’s status as assignee, current holder, or servicer of the Note.1 Consequently, we agree with the district court that the appellants have failed to allege an actual, present controversy.

The judgment of the district court is 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.

1

. Although our unpublished decisions are not precedent, we are persuaded by our prior reasoning on nearly identical facts. *See Val-*Com *Acquisitions Trust v. Chase Home Fin., L.L.C.,*420 Fed.Appx. 405, 406 (5th Cir.2011) (per curiam) (unpublished).
Exhibit 32.1

Written Statement
Pursuant To
18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned, Steven L. Muellner, the Chief Executive Officer of Meade Instruments Corp. (the "Company"), pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§1350, hereby certifies that:

(i)    the
Form 10Q for the quarterly period ended August 31, 2008 of the Company (the "Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date:
October 20, 2008

|    |  |                                                                               |  | 
|--- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|By: |  | /s/STEVEN L. MUELLNERSteven L. Muellner President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 

---



QuickLinks
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

ANTONIO MARRERO-CRUZ,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 349 MAL 2020

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of December, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       3,749,371
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  104,329
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (18,078)
<INVENTORY>                                    896,572
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               234,162
<PP&E>                                         113,219
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,079,575
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          583,877
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,540
<OTHER-SE>                                   4,492,158
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,079,575
<SALES>                                      1,272,470
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,272,470
<CGS>                                          914,952
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  914,952
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,439,637
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,420
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (972,627)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (972,627)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (972,627)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.42)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.42)
        

</TABLE>