alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 11 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 11 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 11 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 1:07-cv-01543-AKH Document 11 Filed 08/16/2007 Page 4 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER 21 MC 102 (AKH)

LOWER MANHATTAN DISASTER

SITE LITIGATION

LUZ RODRIGUEZ, 07-CV-1521 (AKH)

Plaintiff, NOTICE OF ADOPTION BY

CENTURY 21, INC. OF

-against- ANSWER TO MASTER

COMPLAINT

80 LAFAYETTE ASSOCIATES LLC, ET AL.,

Defendants.

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant CENTURY 21, INC. (hereinafter Century

21), as and for its response to the allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off

Complaint) related to the Master Complaint filed in the above-referenced action, herein adopt

Century 21 s Answer to Master Complaint, dated August 1, 2007, which was filed in the matter

of In re World Trade Center Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC 102 (AKH).

WHEREFORE, Century 21 demands judgment dismissing the above-captioned action

as against it, together with its costs and disbursements.

Dated: New York, New York

September 10, 2007

HARRIS BEACH PLLC

Attorneysfor Defendant

CENTURY 21, INC.

Is

Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

100 Wall Street, 23rd Floor

New York, New York 10005

(212) 687-0100

Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 11 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 1 of 3
TO:

Paul Napoli, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP

115 Broadway, 12th Floor

New York, New York 10006

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C.

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaintjff

James E. Tyrrell, Esq.

Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

Patton Boggs LLP

One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Thomas Egan, Esq.

Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Liaison Counselfor the Defendants

All Other Defense Counsel

Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 11 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATION AS TO SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on September 11, 2007, I caused the following

document to be electronically via the Courts ECF system:

1. Notice of Century 21s Adoption of Answer to Master Complaint.

The undersigned further certifies that on September 11, 2007, I caused the aforesaid

documents to be served via First Class Mail upon the following:

Paul Napoli, Esq. James E. Tyrrell, Esq.

Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern LLP Joseph Hopkins, Esq.

115 Broadway, 12th Floor Patton Boggs LLP

New York, New York 10006 One Riverfront Plaza, 6th Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

Robert A. Grochow, Esq.

Robert A. Grochow, P.C. Thomas Egan, Esq.

233 Broadway, 5th Floor Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer LLP

New York, New York 10279 One Liberty Plaza

New York, New York 10006

Gregory J. Cannata, Esq.

Law Offices of Gregory J. Cannata Liaison Counselfor the Defendants

233 Broadway, 5th Floor

New York, New York 10279

Liaison Counselfor Plaintjffs

Dated: September 11, 2007

Is!

Stanley Goos, Esq. (SG 7062)

Case 1:07-cv-01521-AKH Document 11 Filed 09/11/2007 Page 3 of 3
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24117-24118]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-11883]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Institute of Standards and Technology


Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award Board of Overseers

AGENCY: National Institute of Standards and Technology Department of 
Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. app.

[[Page 24118]]

2, notice is hereby given that there will be a meeting of the Board of 
Overseers of the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award on Thursday, 
May 31, 2001. The Board of Overseers is composed of eleven members 
prominent in the field of quality management and appointed by the 
Secretary of Commerce, assembled to advise the Secretary of Commerce on 
the conduct of the Baldrige Award. The purpose of this meeting is to 
discuss and review information received from the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology with the members of the Judges Panel of the 
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award. The agenda will include: Not-
for-profit Baldrige Category; Expanding ``For-profit'' Business 
Category Eligibility; 2001 Baldrige Criteria Changes and Future 
Criteria Evolution; E-Baldrige Update; and Key Issues from the May 30 
Judges' Meeting.

DATES: The meeting will convene May 31, 2001, at 8:30 a.m. and adjourn 
at 3 p.m. on May 31, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the National Institute of 
Standards and Technology, Administration Building Tenth Floor 
Conference Room, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Harry Hertz, Director, National 
Quality Program, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 
Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, telephone number (301) 975-2361.

    Dated: May 4, 2001.
Karen H. Brown,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 01-11883 Filed 5-10-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-CN-M
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549


We are aware that our report dated January 31, 1999 on our review of interim 
consolidated financial information of Hypercom Corporation (the "Company") 
for the three month and six month periods ended December 31, 1998 and 1997, 
and included in the Company's Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 
1998, is incorporated by reference in the Company's registration statements 
on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-40457, 333-40459, 333-40461 and 333-
40333).  Pursuant to Rule 436(c), under the Securities Act of 1933, this 
report should not be considered a part of the registration statements 
prepared or certified by us within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that 
Act. 



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Phoenix, Arizona

February 11, 1999

<PAGE>                          21
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 8 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 9 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 10 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 11 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 12 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 13 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 14 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 15 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 16 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 17 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 18 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 19 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 20 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 21 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 22 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 23 of 24
Case 1:07-cv-05394-AKH Document 25-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 24 of 24
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
  (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/ John S. SokolJohn S. SokolChairman, Chief Executive Officer
and  President
(Principal Executive Officer) 
March 1, 2010/s/ Matthew C. NolanMatthew C. NolanVice President, Chief Financial Officer,
Treasurer and Secretary
(Principal Financial Officer) 
March 1, 2010
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CEO
      CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350*,**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Guaranty Federal Bancshares, Inc. (the
      “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Shaun A. Burke, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/  Shaun
      A. Burke





Shaun
      A.
      Burke


Chief
      Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)





August
      14, 2007





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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 6479 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 6479

     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain work boots for men.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 2, 2010

 Mr. Carnahan introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To suspend temporarily the duty on certain work boots for men.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN WORK BOOTS FOR MEN.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.64.01  Work footwear for   Free            No change       No change       On or before 12/    ''.
                     men with outer                                                      31/2012.........
                     soles of rubber,
                     plastics, leather
                     or composition
                     leather and
                     uppers of
                     leather,
                     incorporating a
                     protective toe
                     cap of materials
                     other than metal,
                     covering the
                     ankle to a height
                     greater than 6"
                     (provided for in
                     subheading
                     6403.91.60.10)...

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 832 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the financing of 

the Superfund. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 3, 2009 

Mr. PALLONE (for himself and Mr. BLUMENAUER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the financing of the Superfund. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Superfund Polluter 

5 Pays Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF SUPERFUND TAXES. 

7 (a) EXCISE TAXES.—Section 4611(e) of the Internal 

8 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows: 

9 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE

10 SUPERFUND FINANCING RATE.—The Hazardous SubVerDate Nov 24 2008 02:28 Feb 05, 2009 Jkt 079200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H832.IH H832

jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 832 IH

1 stance Superfund financing rate under this section shall 

2 apply after December 31, 1986, and before January 1, 

3 1996, and after the date of the enactment of this sub4 section and before January 1, 2019.’’. 

5 (b) CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL INCOME TAX.— 

6 Section 59A(e) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

7 amended to read as follows: 

8 ‘‘(e) APPLICATION OF TAX.—The tax imposed by this 

9 section shall apply to taxable years beginning after De10 cember 31, 1986, and before January 1, 1996, and to tax11 able years beginning after the date of the enactment of 

12 this subsection and before January 1, 2019.’’. 

13 (c) TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS.— 

14 (1) Section 4611(b) of the Internal Revenue 

15 Code of 1986 is amended— 

16 (A) by striking ‘‘or exported from’’ in 

17 paragraph (1)(A), 

18 (B) by striking ‘‘or exportation’’ in para19 graph (1)(B), and 

20 (C) by striking ‘‘AND EXPORTATION’’ in 

21 the heading. 

22 (2) Section 4611(d)(3) of such Code is amend23 ed— 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•HR 832 IH

1 (A) by striking ‘‘or exporting the crude oil, 

2 as the case may be’’ in the text and inserting 

3 ‘‘the crude oil’’, and 

4 (B) by striking ‘‘OR EXPORTS’’ in the 

5 heading. 

6 (d) EFFECTIVE DATES.— 

7 (1) EXCISE TAXES.—The amendments made by 

8 subsections (a) and (c) shall take effect on the date 

9 of the enactment of this Act. 

10 (2) INCOME TAX.—The amendment made by 

11 subsection (b) shall apply to taxable years beginning 

12 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 24, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-40123

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CONRADO CANTU,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:05-CR-458-1 

--------------------

Before REAVLEY, BARKSDALE and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Conrado Cantu appeals his guilty-plea conviction and

sentence for racketeering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c). 

Cantu argues that the district court erred in enhancing his

offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 for his obstructive

behavior. He contends further that his waiver of his right to

appeal his sentence is not enforceable in light of the

Government’s breach of an oral plea agreement.

We first address Cantu’s breach argument, which we review de

novo. See United States v. Price, 95 F.3d 364, 367 (5th Cir.
No. 06-40123

-2-

1996). Cantu has not carried his burden of establishing by a

preponderance of the evidence that the Government breached the

plea agreement. United States v. Laday, 56 F.3d 24, 26 (5th Cir.

1995). The terms of Cantu’s plea agreement were explicit and

clear. The plea agreement did not obligate the Government to

file a § 5K1.1 motion or to recommend any particular sentence. 

Despite Cantu’s self-serving allegations, there is nothing in the

record to support his assertion that the Government made oral

promises outside of the plea agreement and later breached those

promises. See United States v. Ballis, 28 F.3d 1399, 1410 (5th

Cir. 1994) (although circumstances surrounding the agreement’s

negotiations might indicate the parties’ intent, “parol evidence

is inadmissible to prove the meaning of an unambiguous plea

agreement.”) 

Cantu’s plea agreement contained an appeal waiver, which the

Government seeks to enforce and which the record establishes was

entered into knowingly and voluntarily. See United States v.

Robinson, 187 F.3d 516, 517 (5th Cir. 1999). Therefore, Cantu’s

appeal of the § 3C1.1 enhancement is barred by his waiver and is

dismissed. See United States v. Melancon, 972 F.2d 566, 568 (5th

Cir. 1992).

APPEAL DISMISSED.
## Breadcrumb

-  about 

#           Documents      

-  About 
-  About Us 
-  Survey Manual 
-  Key Officials 
-  Organization 
-  Congressional 
-  Budget 
-  Careers and Employees 
-  Doing Business 
-  Emergency Management 
-  Documents 
-  Emergency Management Resources 

This is a collection of supporting documents to include instructions, training materials, technical memos, flowcharts, analytical references, and more. 

Official USGS Publications

**File icon

October 14, 1994

####   TM95-01 National Water Quality Laboratory Alkalinity Reanalysis Policy

**File icon

October 14, 1994

####   TM95-02 Separate Analytical Services Request Form Suggested for Trace Element ppb Protocol

**File icon

October 14, 1994

####   TM95-03 Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometry to replace Atomic Absorption Spectrometric, Chelation-extraction for the determination of molybdenum in water

**File icon

September 14, 1994

####   MOU between USGS and DOD - GPS precise positioning service

**File icon

August 25, 1994

####   TM94-13 National Water Quality Laboratory Reporting Level for the Oil and Grease in Bottom Material Analysis

**File icon

July 8, 1994

####   TM94-12 Description and guide for interpreting low-level data supplied by the NWQL for schedules 2001, 2010, 2050, and 2051

**File icon

May 4, 1994

####   TM94-11 New prices and lab codes for sulfur isotope (delta-34 S) analysis

**File icon

April 12, 1994

####   TM94-10 Change in decay calculations at the University of Miami Tritium Laboratory - Change in oxygen isotopic data at the Reston Stable Isotope Laboratory

**File icon

March 4, 1994

####   TM94-08 Availability of ICP-MS and a comparison of its analytical capabilities with more established techniques

**File icon

March 4, 1994

####   TM94-09 Calculation error on mercury bottom material data

**File icon

February 10, 1994

####   TM94-07 Description and use by districts of Laboratory QC sample information in organic determinations

**File icon

January 25, 1994

####   MOU between USGS and National Park Service

#### Pagination

-  First page« First 
-  Previous page‹‹ 
- ...
-                Page            486 
-                Page            487 
-                Page            488 
-                Page            489 
-                Current page            490 
-                Page            491 
-                Page            492 
-                Page            493 
-                Page            494 
- ...
-  Next page›› 
-  Last pageLast »
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**RULE 13a-14(a) OR RULE 15d-14(a) OF THE**

**SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

 

I, Charles F. Cargile, certify that:

 

1.              I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Newport Corporation; and

 

2.              Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

 
| Date: March 24,   2016 |                                             |
|-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                        |                                             |
|                        | */s/   Charles F. Cargile*                       |
|                        | Charles F. Cargile                               |
|                        | Senior Vice President,   Chief Financial Officer |
|                        | and Treasurer   (Principal Financial Officer)    |

 

----
#### Louderback, Gilbert *&*Company *vs.*Lilly & Wood

Where a firm contracted a debt, and subsequently dissolved, and thereafter, with notice of the dissolution, the creditors accepted the individual drafts of one of the partners for the debt, and ex-, tended the time of payment, without the knowledge or consent of the retiring partner, the latter was thereby released from such debt.

October 13, 1885.

Partnership. Debtor and Creditor. Before Judge Prior. City Court of Hall County. October Term, 1884.

Reported in the decision.

F. M. Johnson, for plaintiffs in error.

W. S. Pickrell; M. L. Smith; Dunlap & Thompson, for defendants.

Hall, Justice.

This was a suit upon an indebtedness to plaintiffs, contracted by the defendants as merchants and partners, in the course of their joint business. After the dissolution *856of the firm, of which plaintiffs had notice, they accepted the individual drafts of Lilly, and extended the time of payment, without the knowledge or consent of Wood, the retiring partner. Wood insisted that this arrangement released him from the debt sued on, and the court below held the defence good. There was no dispute as to these facts, and that this ruling was correct, there can be no doubt. *Stone vs. Chamberlin Bancroft,*20 Ga., 259; s. c., 24 *Id.,*310. After dissolution, a partner has no power to bind the firm by a new contract, nor to revive one for any cause extant, nor to renew or continue an'existing liability, nor change its dignity or its nature. Code, §1917, and citations; also *Ib.,*§1896. Again, “ after the dissolution of a partnership, a new promise by one partner revives or extends the partnership debt only as to himself, and not as to his co-partners.” *Ib.,*§2937. As this point is decisive of the case, it is needless to consider other questions brought up in the record.

Judgment affirmed.