alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Declaration of Disaster #3346] 

Laurel County and the contiguous counties of Clay, Jackson, Knox, McCreary, Pulaski, Rockcastle and Whitley constitute a disaster area due to damages caused by severe storms and tornadoes that occurred on June 2, 2001. Applications for loans for physical damage may be filed until the close of business on August 10, 2001 and for economic injury until the close of business on March 11, 2002 at the address listed below or other locally announced locations: U.S. Small Business Administration, Disaster Area 2 Office, One Baltimore Place, Suite 300, Atlanta, GA 30308. 

The interest rates are: 

## For Physical Damage 

                    Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *6.625%*

                    Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *3.312%*

                    Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *8.000%*

                    Businesses and Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *4.000%*

                    Others (Including Non-Profit Organizations) With Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *7.125%*

## For Economic Injury 

                    Businesses and Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit Available Elsewhere:                     *4.000%*

The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 334611 and for economic injury the number assigned is 9L8500.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008)

Dated: June 11, 2001. 

John Whitmore, 

Acting Administrator.

[FR Doc. 01-15454 Filed 6-19-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-U
SEC Exhibit



Exhibit 10.1



AMENDMENT NO. 3
TO THE
CAESARS ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION
2012 PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE PLAN


This Amendment No. 3 (“ Amendment”) to the Caesars Entertainment Corporation 2012 Performance Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), is adopted by Caesars Entertainment Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”). Capitalized terms used in this Amendment and not otherwise defined shall have the same meanings assigned to them in the Plan.
RECITALS


A. Section 4.2 of the Plan provides that the maximum number of shares of Common Stock that may be delivered pursuant to awards granted under the Plan is the sum of (1) 14,867,018 shares of Common Stock, plus (2) the number of shares of Common Stock subject to stock options granted under the Company’s Management Equity Incentive Plan (the “MEIP”) and outstanding on the Stockholder Approval Date (as such term is used in the Plan) which expired, or for any reason were cancelled or terminated, after the Stockholder Approval Date without being exercised, plus (3) the number of shares of Common Stock that, as of the Stockholder Approval Date, remained available for issuance pursuant to the MEIP, other than shares of Common Stock subject to options that were outstanding as of the Stockholder Approval Date.


B. Section 8.6 of the Plan provides that the Board of Directors of the Company (the “ Board ”) may amend or modify the Plan at any time, provided , however , that to the extent necessary to comply with any applicable law, the Company must obtain stockholder approval of any Plan amendment as required.


C. The Board believes it to be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to amend the Plan to increase the maximum number of shares of Common Stock that may be delivered pursuant to awards granted under the Plan, pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Plan, subject to approval by the stockholders of the Company.


AMENDMENT


1. Subject to approval by the stockholders of the Company, Section 4.2 of the Plan is hereby amended by striking “14,867,018” and replacing it with “22,367,018”.


2. Except as otherwise expressly set forth in this Amendment, all other Articles, Sections, terms and conditions of the Plan remain unchanged and in full force and effect.
Chandler P. SMITH, petitioner, v. BOROUGH OF MORRISVILLE, PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 16-5836.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1649 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1649

  Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish the 
           Committee on Regulatory Review and American Jobs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 22, 2010

Mr. Posey submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                           Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to establish the 
           Committee on Regulatory Review and American Jobs.

    Resolved, That (a) clause 1 of rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives is amended by redesignating paragraphs (n) through (t) 
as paragraphs (o) through (u) and by inserting after paragraph (m) the 
following new paragraph:
            ``(n) Committee on Regulatory Review and American Jobs.--
                    ``(1) Reviewing all final and proposed Federal 
                regulations to determine if such regulations would 
                result in the loss of U.S. jobs.
                    ``(2) Imposing a moratorium on such regulations.''.
    (b) Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives is 
amended by adding at the end the following new clause:
``Privileged motions respecting bills reported by the Committee on 
              Regulatory Review and American Jobs
    ``8. If a bill reported by the Committee on Regulatory Review and 
American Jobs has been referred to the applicable calendar by the 
Speaker, after such bill has been on that calendar for sixty calendar 
days, a motion to proceed to its consideration is privileged.''.
    Sec. 2.  The amendments made by the first section shall take effect 
immediately before noon, January 3, 2011.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6072

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

RONALD WILLIAM HAMMOND,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (CR96-175-CCB, CA-97-4282-CCB)

Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 19, 1999

Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Ronald William Hammond, Appellant Pro Se. Lynne Ann Battaglia,

United States Attorney, Gregory Welsh, Assistant United States Attorney, Katharine Jacobs Armentrout, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Ronald William Hammond seeks to appeal the district court’s

orders denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998), and declining to grant relief from the judgment

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b). We have reviewed the record and the

district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal

on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v.

Hammond, Nos. CR-96-175-CCB; CA-97-4282-CCB (D. Md. Dec. 22, 1998).

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
#### Lorenzo Dominic RICHARDSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Corinda GREENE, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 11-1745.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Feb. 9, 2012.

Decided: Feb. 13, 2012.

*241Lorenzo Dominic Richardson, Appellant Pro Se.

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lorenzo Dominic Richardson appeals the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his complaint in which he sought to appeal the state court’s denial of his request to appeal his North Carolina child support order. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2006). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. *See District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman,*460 U.S. 462, 482, 103 S.Ct. 1303, 75 L.Ed.2d 206 (1983). Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Richardson v. Greene,*No. 5:11-cv-00202-H (E.D.N.C. July 6, 2011). We deny Richardson’s motions for relief and 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.*
----

----

I Säädökset, jotka on julkaistava

----

KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 1936/2004,

annettu 9 päivänä marraskuuta 2004,

tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi

EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO, joka

ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen,

ottaa huomioon hedelmien ja vihannesten tuontijärjestelmän soveltamista koskevista yksityiskohtaisista säännöistä 21 päivänä joulukuuta 1994 annetun komission asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 (1) ja erityisesti sen 4 artiklan 1 kohdan,

sekä katsoo seuraavaa:

ON ANTANUT TÄMÄN ASETUKSEN:

1 artikla

Asetuksen (EY) N:o 3223/94 4 artiklassa tarkoitetut tuonnin kiinteät arvot vahvistetaan liitteessä olevassa taulukossa merkityllä tavalla.

2 artikla

Tämä asetus tulee voimaan 10 päivänä marraskuuta 2004.

Tämä asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, ja sitä sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa.

Tehty Brysselissä 9 päivänä marraskuuta 2004.

Komission puolesta

J. M. SILVA RODRÍGUEZ

Maatalouden pääosaston pääjohtaja

----

(1)EYVL L 337, 24.12.1994, s. 66. Asetus sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna asetuksella (EY) N:o 1947/2002 (EYVL L 299, 1.11.2002, s. 17).

----

LIITE

tuonnin kiinteistä arvoista tiettyjen hedelmien ja vihannesten tulohinnan määrittämiseksi 9 päivänä marraskuuta 2004 annettuun komission asetukseen

----

(1)  Komission asetuksessa (EY) N:o 2081/2003 (EUVL L 313, 28.11.2003, s. 11) vahvistettu maanimikkeistö. Koodi ”999” tarkoittaa ”muuta alkuperää”.

----

----

KOMISSION ASETUS (EY) N:o 1937/2004,

annettu 9 päivänä marraskuuta 2004,

tuomioistuimen toimivallasta sekä tuomioiden tunnustamisesta ja täytäntöönpanosta siviili- ja kauppaoikeuden alalla annetun neuvoston asetuksen (EY) N:o 44/2001 liitteiden I, II, III ja IV muuttamisesta

EUROOPAN YHTEISÖJEN KOMISSIO, joka

ottaa huomioon Euroopan yhteisön perustamissopimuksen,

ottaa huomioon tuomioistuimen toimivallasta sekä tuomioiden tunnustamisesta ja täytäntöönpanosta siviili- ja kauppaoikeuden alalla 22 päivänä joulukuuta 2000 annetun neuvoston asetuksen (EY) N:o 44/2001 (1) ja erityisesti sen 74 artiklan,

sekä katsoo seuraavaa:

ON ANTANUT TÄMÄN ASETUKSEN:

1 artikla

Muutetaan asetusta (EY) N:o 44/2001 seuraavasti:

2 artikla

Tämä asetus tulee voimaan seitsemäntenä päivänä sen jälkeen, kun se on julkaistu Euroopan unionin virallisessa lehdessä.

Tämä asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, ja sitä sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa.

Tehty Brysselissä 9 päivänä marraskuuta 2004.

Komission puolesta

António VITORINO

Komission jäsen

----

(1)EYVL L 12, 16.1.2001, s. 1. Asetus sellaisena kuin se on viimeksi muutettuna vuoden 2003 liittymisasiakirjalla.

----
Emma WIGGINS, petitioner, v. ROCKFORD HOUSING AUTHORITY, et al.

No. 16-5989.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 28, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District denied.
Filed by Automated Filing Services Inc. (604) 609-0244 - Carbiz Inc. - Exhibit 10.13



  

  DEBENTURE INSTRUCTIONS  

  
                I
  am advised by Carbiz Inc. (the "Corporation") that I have the
  following alternatives with respect to my Debenture number • dated October
  6, 2004 issued by the Corporation (the "Debenture").

        (Please check one)

	 ̈	I can agree to an amendment of the Debenture such
        that it will have a new maturity date of • and a new conversion
        rate such that the "Conversion Rate" (as that term is defined
        in the Debenture) will change from $0.22 to $0.15, and the exercise price
        of each Class A Warrant and Class B Warrant will change from $0.23 to
        $0.30 respectively to $0.15 for each class of Warrant; OR

	 	 
	 ̈	I can have my Debenture repaid in accordance with
        its terms. This will result in the repayment of my original investment
        plus interest as set out therein (5% per annum for the period of May 1,
        2005 to October 5, 2005) totaling in aggregate $• US. By doing so,
        I understand the Debenture will terminate before conversion and so I will
        not receive • Class A and • of Class B warrants.



                In
  either event, by executing this document, the undersigned debenture holder also
  releases the Corporation from any and all obligations, claims or liabilities,
  due to or held by the undersigned debenture holder, his/her successors or assigns.

               Signed
  this _____ day of ____________, 2005 in the city of __________, state of __________.

	 	 	 
	
	 	

	Debenture Holder's Printed Name	 	Witness Printed Name
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	
	 	

    
	Debenture Holder's Signature 	 	Witness Signature
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



I, Francis E. Wilde, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
the Quarterly Report of Tarantella, Inc. on Form 10-Q/A for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Tarantella, Inc.



By:

/s/ Francis E. WildeName: Francis E. WildeTitle: Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)August 11, 2004
Gregory Lawon DEBARDELABEN, petitioner, v. Leon BOLLING, Warden, et al.

No. 16-6233.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 5, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Exhibit 21

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

Subsidiaries of the Registrant
---------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

<S>             <C>                                                      <C>
1.           Compania de Juguetes Mexicanos, S.A. de C.V. (99%)    (Mexico)
2.           MRV, Inc.                                             (Delaware)
3.           Marvel Characters, Inc.                               (Delaware)
4.           Marvel Entertainment Group, Inc.                      (Delaware)
5.           Spider-Man Merchandising LP (50%)                     (Partnership)
6.           Toy Biz International Limited (99%)                   (Hong Kong)

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                           PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350
     (AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Boreal Productions
Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended June 30, 2012, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), and Boreal
Productions Inc. pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, Andrea Fehsenfeld, as Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Boreal Productions Inc., hereby
certify 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 results of operations
          of Boreal Productions Inc.


Dated: August 20, 2012                     /s/ Andrea Fehsenfeld
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Andrea Fehsenfeld
                                           Chief Executive Officer


Dated: August 20, 2012                     /s/ Andrea Fehsenfeld
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Andrea Fehsenfeld
                                           Chief Financial Officer
Elton Eugene HILL, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 16-6012.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Harrisburg Office denied.
Kimberly Jane ALFRIEND, et al., petitioners, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 16-310.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 7, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Justice BREYER took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12** 
**- 1719** 

PATRICIA G. PLUMMER ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE ,
Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Statesville

. Richard L. Voorhees , District Judge. ( 5:11

- cv
- 0 0006

- RLV

- DSC )

Submitted : October 3 1 , 2012 Decided: November 6, 2012

Before NIEMEYER, WYNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Daniel S. Johnson, North Wilkesboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, Luis Pere, Special Assistant United States Attorney, Social Security Administration, Boston, Massachusett s, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Patricia G. Plummer appeals the district court’s order
accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to affirm the
Commissioner of Social Security ’ s decisi on to deny Plummer
disability insurance benefits. We must uphold the decision to
deny benefits if the decision is supported by substantial
evidence and the correct law was applied. See 42 U.S.C.

§ 405(g) ( 2006 ); Johnson v. Barnhart , 434 F.3d 650, 653 (4t h

Cir. 2005) (per curiam). We have thoroughly reviewed the
parties ’ briefs, administrative record, and the materials
submitted in the joint appendix, and find no reversible error.
Accordingly, we affirm. See Plummer v. Astrue , No. 5 : 11

- cv
00 00 6

- RLV

- DSC (W.D. N.C. May 22 , 20 12 ). 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 10.11

 

Spousal Consent

 

The undersigned, Shu Ting, a PRC citizen with PRC Identification Card No.: ******, is the lawful spouse of Huang Jiajia, a PRC citizen with PRC Identification Card No.: ******.  I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably agree to the execution of the following documents (hereinafter referred to as the “Transaction Documents”) by Huang Jiajia, and the disposal of the equity interests of Beijing Dasheng Zhixing Technology Co., Ltd.  (“Dasheng Zhixing”) held by Huang Jiajia and registered in his/her name according to the following documents:

 

(1)                                 The Equity Interest Pledge Agreement entered into by and among, Huang Jiajia, Beijing Dasheng Online Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “WFOE”) and Dasheng Zhixing on June 18, 2013;

 

(2)                                 The Exclusive Option Agreement entered into by and among, Huang Jiajia, the WFOE and Dasheng Zhixing on June 18, 2013;

 

(3)                                 The Power of Attorney executed by Huang Jiajia on June 18, 2013.

 

I hereby undertake not to make any assertions in connection with the equity interests of Dasheng Zhixing which are held by Huang Jiajia.  I hereby further confirm that Huang Jiajia can perform the Transaction Documents and further amend or terminate the Transaction Documents without the authorization or consent from me.

 

I hereby undertake to execute all necessary documents and take all necessary actions to ensure appropriate performance of the Transaction Documents (as may be amended from time to time).

 











 

I hereby agree and undertake that if I obtain any equity interests of Dasheng Zhixing which are held by Huang Jiajia for any reasons, I shall be bound by the Transaction Documents and the Amended and Restated Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement entered into between the WFOE and Dasheng Zhixing as of December 14, 2015 (the “Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement”) (as may be amended from time to time) and comply with the obligations thereunder as a shareholder of Dasheng Zhixing.  For this purpose, upon the WFOE’s request, I shall sign a series of written documents in substantially the same format and content as the Transaction Documents and the Exclusive Business Cooperation Agreement (as may be amended from time to time).

 

 

	
/s/ Shu Ting
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Shu Ting
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Date:   December 14, 2015
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 14

- 00152

- CR

RASHARD TYREAL HOLMES, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 196th District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court No. 27,999

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Moseley2 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION

Rashard Tyreal Holmes , appellant, has filed a motion to dismiss h is appeal. The motion

wa s signed by both Holmes a nd h is counsel in compliance with Rule 42.2(a) of the Texas Rules

of Appellate Procedure

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2(a). As authorized by Rule 42.2 (a), we grant

the motion.

Acc or dingly, we dismiss this appeal.

Bailey C. Moseley

Justice

Date Submitted: October 2, 2014

Date Decided: October 3, 2014

Do Not Publish
Khalon Javon WESTBROOKS, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 16-5709.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District denied.