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
 Poultry Research: Mississippi State, MS
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Southeast Area Mississippi State, Mississippi Poultry Research People & Locations







Ryan H McCarty
                        Poultry Research

                        




                        
                        Research Animal Scientist
                        Phone: (662) 320-7610
                         ext.  662
                        
                        Fax: (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
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:225
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:226
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:227
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:228
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:229
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:230
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:231
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:232
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:233
Case: 1:03-cv-06472 Document #: 32 Filed: 07/20/04 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:234
EXHIBIT 32.1

                         EARTHWORKS ENTERTAINMENT, INC.

     Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Peter Keefe, President, Chief Executive Officer, ("principal executive
officer") of Earthworks Entertainment, Inc. (the "Registrant"), certify that to
the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB/A (Amendment No. 1) for the period ended September 30, 2004 of the
Registrant (the "Report"):

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a){15(d)} of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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


Dated: October 21, 2005                         /s/ PETER KEEFE
                                                ---------------------
                                                Peter Keefe
                                                President, Chief Executive
                                                Officer
Document

Exhibit 10.6

                                    


February 12, 2021


Hi Ursula,


JetBlue is successful because of Crewleaders like you who demonstrate passion, dedication, and a commitment to balancing the interests of our Company, Customers and Shareholders.


As you likely appreciate, the impact of COVID-19 has created an incredibly challenging period for our company, our industry, and all of us as individuals. That said, we want to recognize your significant efforts and contributions despite these challenges with an Executive Retention Award to encourage your continued active employment at JetBlue.


Executive Retention Award: You will be eligible to receive a one-time cash bonus amount of $150,000 on the later of (1) October 31, 2022, OR (2) 30 days following the lapse of CARES Act compensation restrictions, or subsequent legislation establishing similar limitations (such date, the “Payment Date”).  
You must remain actively employed with JetBlue through the Payment Date in order to be eligible to receive payment of the award.  However, should you retire or experience an involuntary termination prior to the Payment Date, any entitlement to the award will be determined by the Company’s Chief Executive Officer and Chief People Officer as the Company deems appropriate in its sole and exclusive discretion based on the circumstances at the time, with payment , if any, occurring on the Payment Date.


Thank you again for your continued extraordinary efforts during this unprecedented time. We look forward to your future contributions and continued success here at JetBlue. 




Best regards,


			
	/s/ Michael Elliott
	Michael Elliott
	Chief People Officer
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1167

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify the method for calculating

cost of production for purposes of determining antidumping margins.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 11, 1997

Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. AKAKA) introduced the following bill; which

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to clarify the method

for calculating cost of production for purposes of determining antidumping margins.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF RULES FOR CALCULATING

4 COST OF PRODUCTION AND CONSTRUCTED

5 VALUE.

6 Section 773(f)(1)(A) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19

7 U.S.C. 1677b(f)(1)(A)) is amended—

8 (1) by striking ‘‘Costs’’ and inserting ‘‘(i) CAL9 CULATION OF COSTS.—Costs’’;
2

•S 1167 IS

1 (2) by striking ‘‘The Administering authority’’

2 and inserting ‘‘(ii) ALLOCATION OF COSTS.—

3 ‘‘(I) GENERAL RULE.—The ad4 ministering authority’’;

5 (3) by indenting the text so as to align clauses

6 (i) and (ii) (as added by paragraphs (1) and (2))

7 with clause (i) of subparagraph (C) of such section

8 773(f)(1)); and

9 (4) by adding at the end the following:

10 ‘‘(II) METHODS FOR ALLOCATING

11 COST OF PRODUCTION.—In determin12 ing the proper allocation of costs, the

13 administering authority may use

14 value-based methodology, weight15 based cost methodology, or any other

16 methodology that is consistent with

17 generally accepted accounting prin18 ciples of the exporter country (or pro19 ducing country, where appropriate)

20 and that reasonably reflects the costs

21 associated with the production and

22 sale of each product.’’.

23 (b) APPLICATION TO CANADA AND MEXICO.—Pursu24 ant to article 1902 of the North American Free Trade

25 Agreement and section 408 of the North American Free
3

•S 1167 IS

1 Trade Agreement Implementation Act, the amendments

2 made by this section shall apply with respect to goods from

3 Canada and Mexico.

4 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

5 this section shall apply with respect to—

6 (1) investigations initiated—

7 (A) on the basis of petitions filed under

8 section 732(b) or 783(b) of the Tariff Act of

9 1930 after January 1, 1995; or

10 (B) by the administering authority under

11 section 732(a) of such Act after such date;

12 (2) reviews initiated under section 751 of such

13 Act—

14 (A) by the administering authority or the

15 Commission on their own initiative after such

16 date; or

17 (B) pursuant to a request filed after such

18 date;

19 (3) petitions filed under section 780 of such Act

20 after such date; and

21 (4) inquiries initiated under section 781 of such

22 Act—

23 (A) by the administering authority on its

24 initiative after such date; or
4

•S 1167 IS

1 (B) pursuant to a request filed after such

2 date.

Æ
Opinion issued December 2 , 2021

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01 - 21 - 00515 - CV

——————————— IN RE MAINTENANCE OF WAY EQUIPMENT SERVICES, LLC , Relat or

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDU M OPINION Relator, Maintenance of Way Equipment Services, LLC, filed a petition for writ of mandamus challenging the denial of its motion to compel discovery. 1 Shortly after filing the mandamus petition , relator filed a pleading averring that the matters

1 The underlying case is Maintenance of Way Equipment Services, LLC v. Marcus Mukoro , cause number 20

- CCV

- 067235 , pending in the County Court at Law No
. 3 of Fort Bend County, Texas, the Honorable Juli Mathew presiding.2

raised in the petition were rendered moot by subsequent orders issued by the trial court . Accordingly, we dismiss th is original proceeding as moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Goodman, Rivas

- Molloy, and Farris
.
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 of Silverleaf Resorts, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert M. Sinnott,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:
 
 (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.
  
 Dated:  May
      11, 2009
                /s/ ROBERT M. SINNOTTRobert
      M. SinnottChief
      Financial Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vernon Jackson, Appellant.

[941 NYS2d 521]

Appeal by the defendant, as limited by his motion, from a sentence of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kron, J.), imposed June 28, 2010, on the ground that the sentence was excessive.

Ordered that the sentence is affirmed.

*908Contrary to the People’s contention, the defendant did not validly waive his right to appeal *(see People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 256 [2006]; *People v Rosato,*37 AD3d 741 [2007]). However, the sentence imposed was not excessive *(see People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80 [1982]). Mastro, A.P.J., Florio, Balkin and Chambers, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 99.2****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 Annual Report The Thaxton Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Allan F. Ross, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

 

|   |   |   |                                |
|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------|
|        |   |   | /s/ ALLAN F. ROSS                   |
|   |   |   |                                     |
|   |   |   | ***Allan F. Ross*********           |
|   |   |   | ***Chief Financial Officer********* |
|   |   |   | *March 26, 2003***                  |

Thiscertification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EXHIBIT 10.2

​
​
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE
MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
2018 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
​
​
THIS SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC. 2018 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN (this “Amendment”) is made and adopted effective April 15, 2021 by Merit Medical Systems, Inc., contingent upon approval of this Amendment by the shareholders of the Company not later than June 30, 2021.
​
WHEREAS, Merit Medical Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Merit Medical Systems, Inc. 2018 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of its employees and the employees of its participating subsidiaries; and
​
WHEREAS, it is necessary and desirable to amend the Plan to increase the number of shares of Company common stock (“Shares”) authorized for grant under the Plan from 3,100,000 Shares to 6,100,000 Shares; and
​
WHEREAS, the Company, acting through its Board of Directors (the “Board”), has reserved the right to amend the Plan at any time and from time to time, subject to shareholder approval in the case of certain material modifications;
​
NOW, THEREFORE, contingent upon approval of this Amendment by the shareholders of the Company not later than June 30, 2021, the Plan is amended as follows effective April 15, 2021:
​
1.  The first sentence of Section 3.1(a) of the Plan, setting forth the number of Shares authorized for grant under the Plan, is amended to read as follows:
​
"(a)Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 12.2, a total of 6,100,000 Shares shall be authorized for grant under the Plan.  Any Shares that are subject to Awards of Options or Stock Appreciation Rights shall be counted against this limit as one (1) Share for every one (1) Share granted.  Any Shares that are subject to Awards other than Options or Stock Appreciation Rights shall be counted against this limit as two and one-half (21⁄2) Shares for every one (1) Share granted.”
​
2.  The third sentence of Section 5.7 of the Plan, relating to the maximum number of Shares with respect to which incentive stock options may be granted under the Plan is amended to read as follows:
​
“Solely for the purposes of determining whether Shares are available for the grant of Incentive Stock Options under the Plan, the maximum aggregate number of Shares with respect to which Incentive Stock Options may be issued under the Plan shall be 6,100,000 Shares, subject to adjustment under Section 12.2.”
   ​
3.  Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the shareholders of the Company fail to approve this Amendment by June 30, 2021, this Amendment shall be null and void.  Except as provided above, the terms of the Plan are hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer effective as of April 15, 2021, contingent upon approval of this Amendment by the shareholders of the Company not later than June 30, 2021.
​
​
MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.
​
​
​
By:  __/s/ Fred P. Lampropoulos__________________ 
Name:  __Fred P. Lampropoulos__________________
Title:  ___Chief Executive Officer_________________
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 1 of 29 PageID #:1
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 2 of 29 PageID #:2
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 3 of 29 PageID #:3
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 4 of 29 PageID #:4
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 5 of 29 PageID #:5
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 6 of 29 PageID #:6
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 7 of 29 PageID #:7
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 8 of 29 PageID #:8
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 9 of 29 PageID #:9
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 10 of 29 PageID #:10
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 11 of 29 PageID #:11
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 12 of 29 PageID #:12
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 13 of 29 PageID #:13
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 14 of 29 PageID #:14
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 15 of 29 PageID #:15
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 16 of 29 PageID #:16
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 17 of 29 PageID #:17
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 18 of 29 PageID #:18
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 19 of 29 PageID #:19
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 20 of 29 PageID #:20
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 21 of 29 PageID #:21
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 22 of 29 PageID #:22
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 23 of 29 PageID #:23
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 24 of 29 PageID #:24
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 25 of 29 PageID #:25
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 26 of 29 PageID #:26
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 27 of 29 PageID #:27
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 28 of 29 PageID #:28
Case: 1:03-cv-08704 Document #: 1 Filed: 12/02/03 Page 29 of 29 PageID #:29
#### Khaled Hossan, Appellant, v William Hernandez et al., Respondents.

[941 NYS2d 878]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Strauss, J.), dated May 11, 2011, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that he did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied.

The defendants met their prima facie burden of showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject accident (see *Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 956-957 [1992]). The defendants submitted competent medical evidence establishing, prima facie, that the alleged injuries to the cervical region of the plaintiffs spine did not constitute a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Rodriguez v Huerfano,*46 AD3d 794, 795 [2007]).

However, in opposition, the plaintiff submitted competent medical evidence raising a triable issue of fact as to whether the alleged injuries to the cervical region of his spine constituted a serious injury under the permanent consequential limitation of use and/or significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) *(see Perl v Meher,*18 NY3d 208, 215-218 [2011]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Dillon, J.E, Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Braveon Grant, Appellant.

[947 NYS2d 352]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (M. William Boiler, A. J), rendered December 20, 2010. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted burglary in the second degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon his plea of guilty of attempted burglary in the second degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 140.25 [2]). Contrary to defendant’s contention, his valid waiver of the right to appeal forecloses his challenge to the severity of the sentence (see *People v Lopez,*6 NY3d 248, 255 [2006]; *see generally People v Lococo,*92 NY2d 825, 827 [1998]; *People v Hidalgo,*91 NY2d 733, 737 [1998]). Supreme Court advised defendant at the time of the waiver of the potential maximum term of incarceration, and thus the waiver encompasses defendant’s present challenge to the sentence *(see Lococo,*92 NY2d at 827; *cf. People v Newman,*21 AD3d 1343 [2005]; *People v McLean,*302 AD2d 934 [2003]). Present — Centra, J.P., Fahey, Peradotto, Carni and Sconiers, JJ.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Chief Judge F itzpatrick, Judge Kelsey and Senior Judge Bumgardner

SOPHIA L. BANKS MEMORANDUM OPINION * v. Record No. 2466-05-2 PER CURIAM FEBRUARY 28, 2006 DILLWYN CORRECTIONAL CENTER/ COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION (Bernice Stafford-Turner, on brief), for appellant. (Robert F. McDonnell, Attorn ey General; Maureen Riley Matsen, Deputy Attorney General; Scott J. Fitzgerald, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Donald G. Powers, Senior Assistant Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Sophia L. Banks appeals a decision of th e Workers’ Compensation Commission finding that she failed to prove she sustained an injury by accident arising out of her employment on July 18, 2004. We have reviewed the record and the co mmission’s opinion and fi nd that this appeal is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final opinion. See Banks v. Dillwyn Correctional Center/Commonwealth of Virginia , VWC File No. 219-76-23 (Sept. 9, 2005). We dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are adequately pres ented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the de cisional process. See Code § 17.1-403; Rule 5A:27. 1

Affirmed.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opin ion is not designated for publication.

1 We deny appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal.
Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:32

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:33

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:34

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:35

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:36

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:37

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 7 of 8 PageID #:38

Case: 1:03-cr-00933 Document #: 20  Filed: 03/18/04 Page 8 of 8 PageID #:39