alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- Home
- Visiting Capitol Hill
- Visitor Information

# Book a Tour

## U.S. Capitol & U.S. Capitol Visitor Center

Tours of the U.S. Capitol can be booked several ways. U.S. residents can go directly through the offices of their Representative or Senators. These Congressional offices typically offer their own staff-led tours and most can assist in reserving a general tour. You can locate your representative here or your senators here.Tours can also be arranged directly through the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center (CVC) using an online reservation system. To make a reservation, please visit www.visitthecapitol.gov/plan-visit/book-tour-capitol.The guided tours originate in the U.S. Capitol Visitor Center, and begin with an orientation film that discusses the Founding Fathers' efforts to establish our representative democracy, as well as illustrates the construction of the historic U.S. Capitol. On the tour, visitors will see the Crypt, Rotunda, and National Statuary Hall.

## Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building

Tours of the Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building are offered without prior reservations. Tours occur every hour, Monday – Friday from 10:30 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. and on Saturday from 10:30 a.m. – 2:30 p.m. On federal holidays, the first tour begins at 9:30 a.m. Please visit the Jefferson Building Ground Floor Information Desk for tour availability at least 20 minutes prior to tour time.

## Visiting Capitol Hill

              - Visitor Information
              - Official Business
              - Activities Requiring Permits
              - Regulations & Prohibitions
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                              47
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    3,449
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (18)
<INVENTORY>                                      2,526
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,338
<PP&E>                                           6,054
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,911
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,744
<BONDS>                                          2,732
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,099
<OTHER-SE>                                       (875)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,700
<SALES>                                          5,245
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,245
<CGS>                                            3,954
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,803
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    18
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 171
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    271
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (83)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                188
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       188
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, T. Kendall Hunt,
certify, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for VASCO Data Security International, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, 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, 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.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                              
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ T. Kendall Hunt                                           
|                                                              
|T. Kendall Hunt                                               
|Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of
Directors
|August 8, 2007
Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.9 

 

 


 

  
 NUMBER

 ABC 16666 

Ameris Bancorp 

INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF GEORGIA 

SHARES 

SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS 

CUSIP 03076K 10 8 

This is to belief that 

Is the owner of 

Fully paid and non-assessable shares of the common stock of the par value of $1 each of Ameris Bancorp , transferable on
the books of the company in person, or by duly authorized attorney, upon surrender of this certificate properly ordered. 

This certificate shall not be valid until countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Register. 

Witness the facsimile seal of the company and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. 

EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CORPORATE SECRETARY 

PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 

COUNTERSIGNED AND REGISTERED: 

COMPUTER SHARE INVESTOR SERVICES, LLC 

TRANSFER AGENT 

BY AND REGISTRAR 

AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE 

DATED 

AMERIS BANCORP 

CORPORATE 

SEAL 

1981 

GEORGIA 








 

 

  
 AMERIS BANCORP

 The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed
as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: 
 TEN COM — as tenants
in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT — Custodian 
 TEN F.NT — as tenants by the entireties (Cust) (Minor)

 JT TEN — as joint tenants with right of under Uniform Gifts to Minors 

survivorship and not as tenants Act 

in common (State) 

Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. 

PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE 

FOR VALUE RECEIVED 

THE SIGNATURE TO 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. 
 S!GNATURE(S) GUARANTEED: 

THE SIGNATURE(S) SHOULD BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATIONS AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15. 

Here sell assign and transfer undo 

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

Shares of the common stock represented by the within certificate, and do hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint

 Attorney so transfer the said stock on the books of the within named company with full power of substitution
in the premises. 
 Dated
EX-10.15





 Exhibit 10.15 

 
 



 
  

			
	TO:	  	MICHAEL GRAHAM
		
	FROM:	  	STEVE ESTES
		
	DATE:	  	JULY 8, 2019
		
	SUBJECT:	  	PLANNED ISSUANCE OF RESTRICTED STOCK

  
  

As we have discussed, a critical component of our ongoing business strategy for Reynolds Consumer Products LLC will be to explore opportunities for the
business that could lead to an Initial Public Offering (IPO) of the business or potentially a divestiture of the associated business entities. Your assistance is needed by Reynolds as we work through this process to help prepare the business for a
successful transaction. 
 If the IPO is successful, the company whose shares are registered in the IPO will issue you Restricted Stock at the completion of
the IPO. The number of shares in this grant equals $399,358 divided by the IPO price as of the date of the grant, rounded to the nearest whole share. Vesting for the restricted stock will occur over a 3-year
period with 1/3 vesting after 12-months from the successful IPO; 1/3 vesting after 24-months from the successful IPO; and, 1/3 vesting after 36-months from the successful IPO. You must be an employee of the Company or one of its affiliates on the applicable vesting date to receive such shares. 

Should there be a business sale instead of an IPO, you will receive $399,358 in cash in lieu of Restricted Stock. For purposes hereof, a business sale means a
sale of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company or a sale of more than 50% of the equity of the Company or such entity. This cash payment will be made in the following manner: 

1⁄2 Payable
30-days post-closing of the sale 
 1⁄2 Payable 180-days post-closing of the sale 
 This memo does not change your
status as an “at-will” employee and does not guarantee your employment for any specific period of time. The Company reserves the right to terminate you at any time and for any or no reason. Any
Restricted Stock issued or cash payment made pursuant to this memo shall be subject to regular tax withholdings and other authorized deductions and will not be treated as compensation for any purpose under any benefit plans or programs, unless
statutorily required. 
 This memo is provided to summarize the agreement that has been reached in this regard between the Company and the employee. Should
an IPO be completed, a formal grant letter for the Restricted Stock will be provided to the employee that documents all terms and conditions related to the grant. 

//s// Steve Estes
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROBERTO HERRERA,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

HUU NGUYEN; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 14-16371

D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01565-SKO

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Sheila K. Oberto, Magistrate Judge, Presiding** 

Submitted June 22, 2015*** 

Before: HAWKINS, GRABER, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Roberto Herrera appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate

FILED

JUL 01 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

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

 ** Herrera consented to proceed before a magistrate judge. See 28

U.S.C. § 636(c).

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
indifference to his serious medical needs and retaliation. We have jurisdiction

under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the district court’s

dismissal for failure to comply with a court order, Pagtalunan v. Galaza, 291 F.3d

639, 640 (9th Cir. 2002), and we affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing Herrera’s action

without prejudice after Herrera failed to file a legible amended pleading in

compliance with the local rules, despite being warned that failure to do so could

result in dismissal. See E.D. Cal. R. 130(b) (documents filed with the court must

be presented legibly); Pagtalunan, 291 F.3d at 640, 642-43 (discussing the five

factors for determining whether to dismiss a case for failure to comply with a court

order and noting that dismissal should not be disturbed absent “a definite and firm

conviction” that the district court “committed a clear error of judgment” (citation

and internal quotation marks omitted)). 

Because we affirm the district court’s dismissal for failure to comply with a

court order, we do not consider Herrera’s challenge to the district court’s order

dismissing his first amended complaint. See Al–Torki v. Kaempen, 78 F.3d 1381,

1386 (9th Cir. 1996) (interlocutory orders cannot be appealed after a dismissal for

failure to prosecute, even if the failure is negligent or due to a mistake). 

AFFIRMED.

2 14-16371
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Johnny Yuen, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Thomas Galligan, J.), rendered on November 22, 1983, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Carro, Milonas and Smith, JJ.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 40904 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. SAMUEL PINEDA PINEDA, also known as Sealed3, also known as Chame, also known as Sammy , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:10

- CR

- 70

- 3

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, GRAVES , and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Samuel Pineda Pineda , federal prisoner # 17572

- 078 , appeals the district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion , i n which he sought a reduction of his sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance . The motion was based on Sentencing Guidelines Amendment 782

.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 15, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-40904 Document: 00515033882 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/15/2019No. 18

- 40904

2 We review t he district court’s decision whether to reduce a sentence under § 3582(c)(2) for abuse of discretion. United States v. Henderson , 636 F.3d 713, 717 (5th Cir. 2011). De novo review applies to t he district court’s interpretation of the Sentencing Guideline s, and we review the district court’s factual findings for clear error. Id. Pineda Pineda argues that the district court erred in finding in the § 3582(c)(2) proceeding that he was responsible for more than 4.5 kilograms of actual methamphetamine , a quant ity that rendered him ineligible for a sentence reduction under § 3582(c)(2) based on Amendment 782

. The drug quantity assessed when Pineda Pineda was sentenced, an undetermined amount above 1.5 kilograms, was not specific enough to determine his eligibil ity for § 3582(c)(2) relief

. The district court did not abuse its discretion here in making the supplemental drug

- quantity finding, based on the record at the time of Pineda Pineda’s sentencing, to deter mine his eligibility for a sentence reduction

. See United States v. Hernandez , 645 F.3d 709 , 712

- 13 (5th Cir. 20 11 )

. The supplemental finding is consistent with the district court’s finding at sentencing and is not clearly erroneous based on the evidence. AFFIRMED. Case: 18-40904 Document: 00515033882 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/15/2019
----

**Exhibit      3(b)**

**BYLAWS**

**OF**

**SOUTHERN        UNION COMPANY**

**SOUTHERN        UNION COMPANY BY-LAWS**

**ARTICLE        I STOCKHOLDERS**

----

----

**ARTICLE        II DIRECTORS**

----

----

----

----

----

**ARTICLE        III EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE**

----

**ARTICLE        IV AUDIT COMMITTEE**

**ARTICLE        V COMPENSATION COMMITTEE**

----

**ARTICLE        VI CORPORATE GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE**

----

**ARTICLE        VII OTHER COMMITTEES**

----

**ARTICLE        VIII OFFICERS**

----

----

**ARTICLE        IX CAPITAL STOCK**

----

**ARTICLE        X EXECUTION OF DOCUMENTS AND INSTRUMENTS**

**ARTICLE        XI INDEMNIFICATION OF DIRECTORS AND OFFICERS**

----

----

----

----

**ARTICLE        XII MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS**

----

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                             Mar-31-2000
<CASH>                                         2,399
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 40,433
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                    4,781
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              52,547
<PP&E>                                        97,610
<DEPRECIATION>                                46,381
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               203,971
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         23,815
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                           1
<OTHER-SE>                                    16,535
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 203,971
<SALES>                                       53,439
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              53,439
<CGS>                                         32,264
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 32,264
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              16,744
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4,014
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  417
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              417
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                     417
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.000
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.000



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 99.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                                  AS ADDED BY
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

           In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Premier
Bancorp, Inc. ("PBI") for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"), I, Bruce E. Sickel, Chief
Financial Officer of PBI, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added
by 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.     To my knowledge, the information contained in the report
                  fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
                  condition and results of operations of PBI as of and for the
                  period covered by the report.

Date: November 8, 2002                     By: /s/ Bruce E. Sickel
                                               --------------------
                                               Bruce E. Sickel
                                               Chief Financial Officer, Director
                                               (Principal Financial Officer)
#### DANSINGER et al., Respondents, v. WHITE, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, Third Department.

May 26, 1894.)

Action by Robert Dan-singer and James H. Vandenburgh against Edward C. White. For former reports, see 19 N. Y. Supp. 897; 20 N. Y. Supp. 985. S. & L. M. Brown, for appellant. Young & Kellogg (L. H. Northup, of counsel), for respondents.

MAYHAM, P. J.

The conclusions of law reached by the learned judge who tried this case seem to be the proper legal deductions, based upon the facts found by him. The facts found by the judge seem to be based upon undisputed evidence, or upon conflicting evidence, upon which a finding either way would be sustained on appeal. We have carefully examined the various objections and exceptions made by the defendant to the rulings of the trial judge, and find no trror for which the judgment should be reversed. ■ An opinion, therefore, seems unnecessary. Judgment affir.med, wiih costs.
- Home
- Contact Us

# Doing Business with USCP

The United States Capitol Police (USCP) has a variety of procurement opportunities. Examples of the types of goods and services that are procured to assist with carrying out the USCP's mission are as follows:
                  - Administrative Goods and Services
                  - Facility Projects
                  - Information Technology Goods and Services
                  - Law Enforcement Goods and Services
                  - Training

Generally, the USCP follows the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR). However, the USCP incorporates certain USCP terms and conditions, clauses, and provisions in its solicitations and request for quotations.Vendors wishing to provide company/product literature should send their information to the USCP via email at Procurement@uscp.gov. Hard copy material may also be provided to the USCP by mail addressed to:United States Capitol PoliceOffice of Acquisition Management119 D Street, NEWashington, DC 20510For general questions or inquiries, please contact the United States Capitol Police, Office of Acquisition Management by email at Procurement@uscp.gov or call (202) 593-4275.

## Contact Us

              - Report a Complaint
              - Doing Business with USCP
              - Frequently Asked Questions
              - Website Problem
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

 

MISC. NO. 10-23

IN RE: RULES ADVISORY COMMITTEE

O R D E R

It is ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 40(b) and (c)(1) of the Court's Rules of Practice and 

Procedure (Rules), that the following individuals are appointed by the Board of Judges to serve as 

a member of the Court's Rules Advisory Committee for a term as indicated:

John D. Niles, Esq., for a two-year term beginning on January 1, 2024, and ending 

December 31, 2025, vice Thomas J. Kniffen, Esq.; and

Chesley Roberts, Esq., for a two-year term beginning on January 1, 2024, and ending 

December 31, 2025, vice Angela K. Drake, Esq.

DATED: December 18, 2023 FOR THE COURT:

 /s/Tiffany M. Wagner

 TIFFANY M. WAGNER

 Clerk of the Court
No. 76-310.

#### Pacific Gas Transmission Co. et al. *v.*Federal Power Commission.

C. A. D. C. Cir. Certiorari denied.
##### 



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
   
  Form 10-KSB Form 10-KSB) Form 10-KSB
 
  
 Dated: April 21, 2008

/s/ William H. Burns, Jr.William H. Burns, Jr. 
    Chief Executive Officer 
    (chief executive officer)Dated: April 21, 2008

/s/ Charles R. Trego, Jr.Charles R. Trego, Jr.
    Chief Financial Officer
    (Principal financial officer)
#### In the Matter of Thomas A. Prisco, Petitioner, v Nassau County Police Department, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to review a determination of the respondent Nassau County Police Department, dated June 28, 1984, revoking the petitioner’s pistol license.

Adjudged that the determination is confirmed, with costs.

There was substantial evidence to support the challenged determination *(see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176), and the penalty imposed does not shock one’s sense of fairness *(Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
#### CLERIHEW, Respondent, v. SHARPLESS, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department.

April 13, 1894.)

Action by Peter I. Clerihew against Henry W. Sharpless. C. J. Hardy, for appellant. John B. Pannes, for respondent.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.