alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF OREGON 

PORTLAND DIVISION 

STEPHEN and RENA MULLER, Case No. 3:14-cv-01345-MO 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

COUNTRY MUTUAL INSURANCE 

COMPANY, 

Defendant. 

VERDICT FORM 

ry ·lS DATED: This --'IY=----o't'--aay of June, 2017. 

VERDICT FORM - 1 

VERDICT FORM 

Chief United States Dist! ct Judge 

Case 3:14-cv-01345-MO Document 246 Filed 06/30/17 Page 1 of 2
We, the jmy, being duly empaneled and sworn in the above-entitled cause, do find as follows. 

1. Did Plaintiffs prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Defendant breached the 

insurance contracts by failing to indemnify Plaintiffs for any covered losses? 

ANSWER: Y!::-S (YesorNo) 

If your answer to Question 1 is "no, " then your verdict is for Defendant. Do not answer 

any more questions, Yourpresidingjuror must sign the verdict form. 

If your answer to Question 1 is "yes, "please go to Question 2. 

2. Did Defendant prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Plaintiffs intentionally set 

or directed another person to set the fire that damaged their property? 

ANS\VER: /\I 0 (Yes or No) 

J.f your answer to Question 2 is "yes, " then your verdict is for Defendant. Do not answer 

any more questions. Yourpresidingjuror must sign the verdict form. 

If your answer to Question 2 is "no, "please go to Question 3 

3. Wbat are Plaintiffs' damages? 

ANSWER: Structure 

Business Property 

Personal Property 

Business Income 

Automobile 

VERDICT FORM - 2 

$ it3(o, 000 

$ s 70 I OD 0 

$ 't SC,, 1 soo 

$ 'J...S10DO 

$ L/ S1 000 

Case 3:14-cv-01345-MO Document 246 Filed 06/30/17 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-1112

ARTHUR O. ARMSTRONG,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

OFFICER WATSON; OFFICER COOK; CHRISTINE

DUFFANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District

Judge. (CA-97-1335-1)

Submitted: April 10, 2001 Decided: May 8, 2001

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Arthur O. Armstrong, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Thompson Wright,

Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Arthur O. Armstrong appeals the district court’s order denying

post-judgment motions. We have reviewed the record and the district court order and find the action frivolous. Accordingly, we

affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Armstrong v.

Watson, No. CA-97-1335-1 (M.D.N.C. filed Dec. 13, 2000; entered

Dec. 14, 2000). We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
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



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of OmniComm
Systems, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, being, Cornelis F. Wit, Chief Executive 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Cornelis F. Wit                            
|Cornelis F. Wit                                
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director



August 10, 2005
Exhibit 10.3

    


     AMENDMENT TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

    


    THIS AMENDMENT TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this
“Agreement”), is entered into as of the 10th day of December 2008 by and
between  BRETT D.
NICHOLAS  (the
“Executive”) and  REDWOOD
TRUST, INC., a Maryland
Corporation (the “Company”).

    


    WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company have
entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated as of February
22, 2005 (as subsequently amended, the “Employment Agreement”);
and

    


    WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company desire
to enter into this Agreement for purposes of amending the Employment Agreement
to increase the Target Bonus specified in the Employment Agreement, effective
January 1, 2009;

    


    NOW,
THEREFORE, for good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy which is hereby acknowledged,
the Executive and the Company hereby agree that Section 3(b) of the Employment
Agreement is hereby amended to add the following sentence at the end of Section
3(b):  

    


    Effective January 1, 2009, the Target
Bonus shall be 150% of Base Salary.

    


    IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the Company has
caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly authorized officer, and the
Executive has executed this Agreement, as of the date first above
written.

     

    
      
        
          
            
              	
                      REDWOOD TRUST,
      INC.

                    	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	
                      By:

                    	
                      /s/ GEORGE
      E. BULL,
      III

                    	 
	 
      	
                      Name: George E. Bull,
      III

                    	 
	 
      	
                      Title:   Chief
      Executive Officer

                    	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	
                      BRETT D.
      NICHOLAS

                    	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	 
      	 
      	 
	
                      /s/  BRETT
      D. NICHOLAS
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

In connection with the Annual
Report of Wolverine Tube, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Harold M. Karp, Principal Executive Officer of
Wolverine Tube, Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

(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.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Wolverine Tube, Inc. and will be retained by Wolverine Tube, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



/s/ Harold M. KarpHarold M. KarpPrincipal Executive OfficerPresident and Chief Operating OfficerMarch 31, 2008
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman,
Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahr a Bridget M. McCormac k

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstei n Kurtis T. Wilde r Elizabeth T. Clement,

J ustices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at t he direction of the Court.

May 29, 2018

s0521 

# Order

Clerk May 29, 2018

156084

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 15 6084 COA: 337639 Washtenaw CC: 04-001501-FC RASON ANGELO HORTON, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the app lication for leave to appeal the May 10, 2017 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, becaus e the defendant’s motion for relief from judgment is pro hibited by MCR 6.502(G).
Case: 1:03-cr-00011 Document #: 285 Filed: 04/06/05 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:1634
Case: 1:03-cr-00011 Document #: 285 Filed: 04/06/05 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:1635
Case: 1:03-cr-00011 Document #: 285 Filed: 04/06/05 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:1636
Case: 1:03-cr-00011 Document #: 285 Filed: 04/06/05 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:1637
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5
       
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                       DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                                     989,337
<SECURITIES>                                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               45,795
<ALLOWANCES>                                                15,552
<INVENTORY>                                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 0
<PP&E>                                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           5,584,504
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                            0
<BONDS>                                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                         0
<OTHER-SE>                                               3,687,982
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             5,584,504
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         2,163,088
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         1,269,106
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            22,221
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                         237,226
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            634,535
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        634,535
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                               634,535
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                    0
        


</TABLE>
II

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1215

To prohibit spending Federal education funds on national testing.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

SEPTEMBER 24, 1997

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

referred to the Committee on Labor and Human Resources

A BILL

To prohibit spending Federal education funds on national

testing.

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION ON NATIONAL TESTING.

4 Part C of the General Education Provisions Act (20

5 U.S.C. 1231 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end

6 the following:

7 ‘‘SEC. 447. PROHIBITION ON NATIONAL TESTING.

8 ‘‘(a) GENERAL PROHIBITION.—Notwithstanding any

9 other provision of Federal law, funds provided to the De10 partment or for an applicable program may not be used
2

•S 1215 IS

1 to develop, plan, implement, or administer any national

2 testing program.

3 ‘‘(b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) shall not apply to

4 the following:

5 ‘‘(1) The National Assessment of Educational

6 Progress carried out under section 411 of the Na7 tional Education Statistics Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C.

8 9010).

9 ‘‘(2) The Third International Mathematics and

10 Science Study (TIMSS).’’.

Æ
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

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of OmniComm Systems, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, being, Cornelis F. Wit, Chief Executive 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Cornelis F. Wit                            
|Cornelis F. Wit                                
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
|                                               

August 11, 2006
1 – OPINION AND ORDER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

ANDY CHUNG,

Plaintiff, Civ. No. 6:14-cv-01485-MC

v. OPINION AND ORDER

RADIO STATION FM 107.5

(FORMALLY 95.5), ALL DJS, 

OWNER-CLEAR CHANNELS, and 

MANAGERS,

Defendants.

_____________________________

MCSHANE, Judge:

Plaintiff, pro se, filed this action against Radio Station FM 107.5, unnamed disk jockeys 

(DJs), unnamed Managers, and Owner, Clear Channels, for various state law claims. Compl. 3, 

5, ECF No. 1.

1 On September 24, 2014, this Court dismissed plaintiff’s action under FRCP

12(b)(6) and 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and failure to state 

a claim. Order 1–4, Sept. 24, 2014, ECF No. 5. In consideration of plaintiff’s pro se status, this 

Court granted plaintiff until October 24, 2014 “to file an amended complaint curing the 

deficiencies identified.” Id. at 4. On October 1, 2014, this Court received a response from 

plaintiff that elaborated on the underlying factual circumstances. Pl.’s Resp. 1–3, ECF No. 7. On 

October 9, 2014, this Court extended plaintiff’s filing deadline until November 10, 2014, and 

again instructed plaintiff “to file an amended complaint curing the deficiencies identified.” Order 

 1 Plaintiff alleged defamation and invasion of privacy (e.g., intrusion upon the seclusion of others and public 

disclosure of private facts). See Compl. 3, ECF No. 1.

Case 6:14-cv-01485-MC Document 13 Filed 11/17/14 Page 1 of 2
2 – OPINION AND ORDER

2, Oct. 9, 2014, ECF No. 8. Plaintiff has not taken additional action since that time. Accordingly, 

because plaintiff failed to comply with this Court’s order, ECF No. 8, this action is dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to prosecute.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 17th day of November, 2014.

____________________________

Michael J. McShane

United States District Judge

Case 6:14-cv-01485-MC Document 13 Filed 11/17/14 Page 2 of 2
exv10w2





Exhibit 10.2




AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




Sections 1 and 11 of the Amended and Restated Employment Agreement are hereby amended effective the
2nd day of December, 2008 (“Amendment”) by and between the parties to the Amended and Restated
Employment Agreement (as named below), effective the 1st day of November, 2004 (“Employment
Agreement”) for the purpose of making the following changes:



Section 1 shall be revised to read as follows:



Section 1. Term. Employer hereby continues the employment of Employee and Employee hereby
accepts continued employment with Employer for a term (the “Term”) beginning on the effective date
hereof (“Commencement Date”) and continuing until December 31, 2011.



Section 11 shall be revised as follows in the second full paragraph thereof: Line 12 — the word
“termination” shall be removed and replaced with “Term” and Line 14 — the words “at any time”
shall be removed and replaced with “upon 90 days prior written notice”.



Except as set forth above in this Amendment, the Employment Agreement shall remain unchanged and in
full force and effect.



As evidenced by signature below, the parties to the Agreement and this Amendment agree to the terms
and conditions of this Amendment, both as to form and substance.



EMPLOYEE:




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	Signature:
	 	/s/ Lawrance W. McAfee	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Print Name: Lawrance W. McAfee	 	 	 	 






EMPLOYER:




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:
	 	/s/ Daniel C. Arnold	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	Daniel C. Arnold, Chairman of the Board of Directors
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

# AGENCY:

Office of Violence Against Women, Department of Justice.

# ACTION:

Notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

                        The Office of Violence Against Women, Department of Justice, submitted two notices for publication in the                         **Federal Register**                         on July 30, 2021 soliciting comments to an information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. The document contained incorrect information.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Written comments and/or suggestion regarding the items contained in this notice, especially the estimated public burden and associated response time, should be directed to Cathy Poston, Office on Violence Against Women, at 202-514-5430 or                         *Catherine.poston@usdoj.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

*Corrections:*                     In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 30, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-16313, on page 41093, in the second column, correct the                     **Action**                     caption to read: 30-Day notice and correct the                     **Dates**                     caption to read: Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until August 30, 2021.                

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 30, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-16312, on page 41094, in the third column, correct the                     **Action**                     caption to read: 30-Day notice and correct the                     **Dates**                     caption to read: Comments are encouraged and will be accepted for 30 days until August 30, 2021.                

Dated: August 9, 2021.

Melody Braswell,

Department Clearance Officer for PRA, U.S. Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 2021-17297 Filed 8-12-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-FX-P
Form of Series A Preferred Stock Certificate


 Exhibit No. 4.1 
  

					
	  
 NUMBER  
	 		 	SHARES
	 * ##
*  
  
	 		 	* #### *

 BUCKHEAD COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC. 
 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA 
  

			
	The shares represented by this certificate are non-voting shares except as provided by law or by the Articles of Incorporation of the issuer	 	Transfer of this stock is restricted in accordance with
conditions printed on the reverse of this certificate.

  

			
	THIS CERTIFIES THAT	 	 [SHAREHOLDER’S NAME]

		
	is the owner of	 	 [NUMBER OF SHARES]


  
 FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE
SHARES OF 
 SERIES A PREFERRED STOCK, NO PAR VALUE, OF 
 BUCKHEAD COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC. 
 (hereinafter called the “Company”). The Company will furnish a
description of the relative rights, preferences, and limitations of the Series A Preferred Stock, without charge, upon receipt of a written request. The shares represented by this certificate are transferable on the books of the Company by said
owner or by his or her duly authorized attorney, upon the surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
Company has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers and its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed. 
  

													
	 Date:
	 	         [DATE]
	 		 		 		 		 	
		 		 		 		 	[SEAL]	 		 	
	  
	 		 		 		 	  

	Dawn Kinard	 		 		 		 		 	Marvin Cosgray
	Chief Financial Officer	 		 		 		 		 	President & Chief Executive Officer







 THE SECURITIES EVIDENCED BY THIS CERTIFICATE HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED (THE
“ACT”), OR APPLICABLE STATE SECURITIES LAWS (THE “STATE ACTS”), AND MAY NOT BE OFFERED, SOLD OR OTHERWISE TRANSFERRED, PLEDGED OR HYPOTHECATED UNLESS AND UNTIL REGISTERED UNDER THE ACT, THE STATE ACTS AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE
SECURITIES LAWS UNLESS BUCKHEAD COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC. DETERMINES THAT SUCH OFFER, SALE, TRANSFER, PLEDGE OR HYPOTHECATION IS EXEMPT FROM REGISTRATION OR IS OTHERWISE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ACT, THE STATE ACTS AND ANY OTHER APPLICABLE SECURITIES
LAWS. IN REACHING ITS DETERMINATION, BUCKHEAD COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC. MAY REQUIRE AN OPINION OF COUNSEL WHICH IS SATISFACTORY TO BUCKHEAD COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC. 
 For value received,                              hereby sell, assign and transfer unto

  

											
	     PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER
         IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF
ASSIGNEE                        
	 		 		 	
		 		 		 		 		 	
		 				
		 	 	 		 		 		 	

  

					
	  
	 		 	
	(PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS, INCLUDING ZIP CODE, OF ASSIGNEE)

  

			
	  
	 	
		
	  
	 	shares

 represented by the within Certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint
                     
 Attorney to transfer
the said shares on the records of the within-named Company with full power of substitution in the premises. 
  

							
	  
	 		 		 	
	 (DATE)
	 		 		 	
			
	  
	 		 	
	(SIGNATURE: THE SIGNATURE ON THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY
CHANGE WHATEVER.)