alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 2.1
 AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER AND REORGANIZATION
 AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF MERGER AND REORGANIZATION
 NOW THEREFORE,
 ARTICLE I
THE MERGER
 The Merger
 The Closing
 Actions at the Closing




---



##### 



Additional Actions
 Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws
   Directors and Officers
 Conversion of Securities
    2




---



##### 



Stock Certificates
 No Further Rights
 Closing of Transfer Books
 ARTICLE II
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE COMPANY
  Organization, Qualification and Corporate Power
  3




---



##### 



Capitalization
 Authorization of Transaction
 Noncontravention
 License Agreement
 Litigation.
 Disclosure
  4




---



##### 



ARTICLE III
REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE PARENT
AND THE ACQUISITION SUBSIDIARY
  Organization, Qualification and Corporate Power
 Capitalization
 Authorization of Transaction
 Noncontravention
 Subsidiary
  5




---



##### 



Litigation
 Board Action
 ARTICLE IV
COVENANTS
 Closing Efforts
 Governmental and Third-Party Notices and Consents
 Expenses
 ARTICLE V
CONDITIONS TO CONSUMMATION OF MERGER
 Conditions to Each Partys Obligations
   Conditions to Obligations of the Parent and the Acquisition Subsidiary
    6




---



##### 



Conditions to Obligations of the Company
     ARTICLE VII
 TERMINATION
 Termination by Mutual Agreement
 Termination for Failure to Close
 Termination by Operation of Law
 Effect of Termination or Default; Remedies
  7




---



##### 



ARTICLE VIII
MISCELLANEOUS
 Press Releases and Announcements
 No Third Party Beneficiaries
 Entire Agreement
 Succession and Assignment
 Counterparts and Facsimile Signature
 Headings
 Notices
  Sauerwein, Simon, & Blanchard, P.C.147 N. Meramec, Suite 200St. Louis, MO 63105Fax: 314.863.9101Attn: Paul A. Simon, Esq.
  8




---



##### 



Governing Law
 Amendments and Waivers
 Severability
 Construction
    9




---



##### 



PARENTCLEANTECH BIOFUELS, INC.By:Name:Title:
    
    President and Chief Executive OfficerACQUISITION SUBSIDIARYBIOMASS NA ACQUISITION SUBISIDARY, INC.By:Name:Title:
    
    President and Chief Executive OfficerCOMPANYBIOMASS NORTH AMERICA LICENSING, INC.By:Name:Title:
    
    President and Chief Executive Officer
  10
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
 
 In connection with the Quarterly Report of Madison Ave. Media, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q /A for the period ending February 28, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, JAMES LINDSEY, Chief Executive 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:
 
 (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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the 20 th day of April, 2011.
 
 
 /s/ JAMES LINDSEY
 Chief Executive Officer
#### BEDFORD OAK PARTNERS, LP, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Emanuel Schmalz; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ICN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.; et al., Defendants-Appellees, and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP; et al., Defendants. *673Bedford Oak Partners, LP, Plaintiff-Appellant, and Emanuel Schmalz; et al., Plaintiffs, v. ICN Pharmaceuticals Inc.; et al., Defendants, and PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Defendant-Appellee.

Nos. 04-56664, 04-56883.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted June 8, 2006.

Filed June 16, 2006.

Christopher L. Nelson, Esq., Sehiffrin & Barroway LLP, Bala Cynwyd, PA, Robert S. Green, Esq., Green Welling, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Robert Scott Dreher, Esq., Dreher Law Firm, Darren J. Robbins, Esq., Lerach Coughlin Stoia Geller, Rudman & Robbins, LLP, Betsy C. Manifold, Esq., Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz, LLP, San Diego, CA, Richard Speirs, Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling, LLP, Mel E. Lifshitz, Esq., Bernstein, Liebhard & Lifshitz, Arthur N. Abbey, Esq., Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq., Ira M. Press, Esq., Kirby, Mcinerney, Squire, LLP, Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr., Esq., Berman De Valerio Pease Tabacco Burt *&*Pucillo, San Francisco, CA, Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq., Glancy And Binkow LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Andrew Robert Jacobs, Esq., Epstein Fitzsimmons Brown Gioia Jacobs & Sprouls, Chatham Township, NJ, for Plaintiffs.

Eric S. Waxman, Esq., Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, Chanmaly Kendie Schlecht, Gregory J. Mann, Esq., O’Donnell Shaeffer *&*Mortimer, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Thad A. Davis, Esq., Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver *&*Hedges, LLP, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants.

Before: D.W. NELSON, RAWLINSON, and BEA, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Appellants contend that the allegations at issue in its First Amended Complaint and Second Amended Complaint satisfy the stringent pleading requirements of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. We disagree. The allegations at issue lack the critical details necessary to establish falsity or raise a strong inference of scienter. *See In re Daou Sys., Inc., Sec. Litig.,*411 F.3d 1006, 1014-15 (9th Cir.2005).

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
1

The Honorable Lewis M. Blanton, United States Magistrate Judge for the

Eastern District of Missouri, to whom the case was referred for final disposition by

consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). 

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 05-2645

___________

Christie N. Schneider, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* Eastern District of Missouri.

Sullivan College; A. R. Sullivan; *

Stephen Coppeck; Greg Cawthorn; * [UNPUBLISHED]

James M. Kearfoit; Sullivan University, *

formerly known as Sullivan College, *

*

Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: October 6, 2006

Filed: October 12, 2006

___________

Before MURPHY, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Christie N. Schneider appeals the district court’s1

 adverse grant of summary

judgment in her employment discrimination action. Having carefully reviewed the

record and considered the parties’ arguments, we agree with the district court that
2

Schneider has waived her other claims, see Watson v. O’Neill, 365 F.3d 609,

614 n.4 (8th Cir. 2004); and we decline to address her newly raised claim under the

Americans with Disabilities Act, see Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir.

2004). 

-2-

Schneider failed to create any trialworthy issues as to whether she filed a valid Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission charge related to her Title VII claim, or

whether her Missouri Human Rights Act claim was timely.2

 See Torres v. UNUM

Life Ins. Co. of Am., 405 F.3d 670, 677 (8th Cir. 2005) (de novo standard of review).

To the extent she is challenging the denial of her motion for reconsideration--

construed as a motion under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e)--we find no abuse

of discretion. See Perkins v. U.S. West Communications, 138 F.3d 336, 340 (8th Cir.

1998) (standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-10252

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JORGE MOLINOS-MARTINEZ, also known as Rodrigo Rodriguez

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:07-CR-288-ALL

Before DAVIS, WIENER, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jorge MolinosMartinez (Molinos) has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Molinos has not filed

a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses

no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 10, 2008

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
H. Res. 1047 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 11, 2010. 

Whereas The Ohio State University (Ohio State) Buckeyes 

football team achieved many historic accomplishments 

during the 2009 regular season; 

Whereas Ohio State defeated favored Oregon 26–17 in the 

Rose Bowl on January 1, 2010; 

Whereas Ohio State won its seventh Rose Bowl all-time; 

Whereas Ohio State won its fifth consecutive Big Ten title 

and played in its fifth consecutive BCS bowl; 

Whereas Ohio State finished the season at 11–2, ranked fifth 

nationally; 

Whereas Ohio State led the Big Ten for the eighth consecutive season in academic all-conference honorees; 

Whereas Ohio State Coach Jim Tressel became only the second coach in Ohio State history to win both a NCAA National Championship and a Rose Bowl (Woody Hayes); 

Whereas the Ohio State defense ranked in the Top 5 nationally in 4 different categories; 

Whereas Quarterback Terrelle Pryor threw for 266 yards, 

ran for 72 yards, and scored two touchdowns, leading all 

players for both teams in these categories; and 
2 

•HRES 1047 EH 

Whereas Quarterback Terrelle Pryor was the Rose Bowl 

MVP: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) commends The Ohio State University (Ohio 

State) Buckeye football team for its victory in the 2010 

Rose Bowl; 

(2) congratulates Coach Jim Tressel, winner of five 

Big Ten titles; and 

(3) recognizes the accomplishments of the Ohio 

State Buckeye football team, which has played in more 

BCS Bowl Games than any other team in college football. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
```

[Federal Register: April 23, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 78)]
[Notices]
[Page 20440]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23ap01-44]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, May 18, 2001.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 01-10076 Filed 4-19-01; 11:23 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

�
EXHIBIT 31.1

                                CERTIFICATIONS

I, William Tay, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Westmont Acquisition
Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers and I are responsible
for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined
in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer
and have:

   (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report
is being prepared;

   (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

   (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of the small business issuer's board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):

   (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information; and

   (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.


Date: August 8, 2008

Westmont Acquisition Corp.


/s/ William Tay
-------------------------------
William Tay, President and CEO
(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)
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 China Quest Acquisition Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the "Report'),
I, Chin Yung Kong, Chief Executive Officer and Principal 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, as amended; and





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





October
7, 2008





/s/
      Chin Yung Kong


Name:
Chin Yung Kong


Title:
Chief Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register: September 24, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 185)]
[Notices]
[Page 48861]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr24se01-39]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, October 12, 2001.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 01-23903 Filed 9-20-01; 12:05 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
```

[Federal Register: August 19, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 160)]
[Notices]
[Page 53781]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr19au02-46]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, September 27, 2002.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance Matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 02-21145 Filed 8-15-02; 12:08 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6983

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

NATHANIEL WATKINS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Chief

District Judge. (CR-90-260)

Submitted: October 24, 2002 Decided: November 14, 2002

Before WILLIAMS and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Nathaniel Watkins, Appellant Pro Se. Michael R. Smythers, Assistant

United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Nathaniel Watkins appeals from the criminal judgment entered

on January 11, 1991. We dismiss the appeal for lack of

jurisdiction.

In criminal cases, the defendant is accorded ten days after

entry of the district court’s final judgment or order to note an

appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A), unless the district court

extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). This

appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” United States v.

Raynor, 939 F.2d 191, 196 (4th Cir. 1991). The district court’s

final judgment was entered on the docket on January 11, 1991.

Watkins’ notice of appeal was filed on June 12, 2002. Because

Watkins failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an

extension of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
| **-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT: | **CL** | **2** |
|-----------|--------|-------|

|  | **Associated Milk Producers, Inc. (AMPI)** |
|--|--------------------------------------------|

| DATE: | 2/23/93 | FR        PAGE: | N/A | PAGES: | 3 |
|-------|---------|------------------|-----|--------|---|

|  | **-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT: | **CL** | **3** |
|-----------|--------|-------|

|  | **Kraft        General Foods** |
|--|---------------------------------|

| DATE: | 2/26/93 | FR        PAGE: | N/A | PAGES: | 13 |
|-------|---------|------------------|-----|--------|----|

|  | **-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

First
Previous
Next
Last
### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION II

In the Matter of the No. 50558

- 4

- II Personal Restraint Petition of

SCOTT ALLEN BOWLER

UNPUBLISHED OPINION

B JORGEN , C.J.

— Scott Bowler seeks relief from personal restraint resulting from his 2016
plea of guilty to second degree burglary. We grant the petition in part and deny the remainder.
In Bowler’s judgment and sentence, the trial court found that Bowler “is indigent and disabled
and is not anticipated to be able to pay financial obligations in the future.” Resp. to Personal Restraint

Pet., App. A, at 4. Th e trial court then imposed the following legal financial obligations (LFOs):
$500 victim assessment, $100 domestic violence assessment, $200 criminal filing fee, and $100

deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) collection fee.
Bowler argues that the trial court er red in imposing any LFOs because of his physical
disabilities and his lack of vocation. But the victim assessment, criminal filing fee, and DNA
collection fee are mandatory LFOs that the trial court must impose. State v. Clark , 191 Wn. App.

369, 373, 362 P.3d 309 (2015). As to domestic violence assessment, the State concedes that it is
a discretionary LFO and that the trial court erred in imposing it. We accept the State’s concession. Filed Washington State Court of Appeals Division Two

December 12, 2017No. 50558

- 4

- II

2

We grant Bowler’s petition in part and remand to the trial court for correction by striking
the $100 domestic violence assessment from Bowler’s judgment and sentence. As to the

mandatory LFOs, we deny the petition.
A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the
Washington Appellat e Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2.06.040,

it is so ordered.

BJORGEN, C.J. We concur:

JOHANSON, J.

SUTTON, J.