alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.32



EXTENSION AGREEMENT



This is an agreement dated as of August 26, 2003 between Lennar Corporation
(Lennar), a Delaware corporation, and LNR Property Corporation (LNR), a Delaware corporation, formerly named LPC, Inc., extending the provisions of Paragraphs 4.1 and 4.2 of the Separation and Distribution Agreement (the
Separation Agreement) dated June 10, 1997 between Lennar and LNR, as amended on October 31, 1997.



The agreement between Lennar and LNR is as follows:



1. Lennar agrees to be bound by Paragraph 4.1 of the Separation Agreement until November 30, 2005.



2. LNR agrees to be bound by Paragraph 4.2 of the Separation Agreement until
November 30, 2005.



3. Lennar and LNR each agrees that no
violation of Paragraph 4.1 or Paragraph 4.2 of the Separation Agreement that has occurred between December 1, 2002 and the date of this Agreement will give rise to any claim by either of them against the other of them.



4. Paragraphs 4.3 through 4.5 and 12.6 through 12.10 of the Separation
Agreement apply to this Agreement to the same extent as though they were set forth in this Agreement. For purposes of this Agreement, the term Lennar Land Partners in Paragraph 4.1, 4.2 or 4.3 of the Separation Agreement will be deemed
to refer to Lennar Land Partners or any other partnership or other entity in which both Lennar and LNR, directly or through subsidiaries, own equity interests.



5. This document contains the entire agreement between Lennar and LNR relating to the obligations that are the subject of
this Agreement, and all prior negotiations, understandings and agreements between Lennar and LNR regarding those obligations are superceded by this Agreement.



6. This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, some of which may bear the signatures of only some of the parties or may bear facsimile
copies of the signatures of some of the parties. Each of those counterparts will be deemed an original copy of this Agreement, but all of them together will be one and the same agreement.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Lennar and LNR have executed this Agreement, intending to be legally bound by it, on the day shown
above.



|                   |  |                        
|------------------ |  | -----------------------
|LENNAR CORPORATION
|                   | 
|By:                |  | /s/    BRUCE GROSS     
|                   |  |                        
|Title:             |  | Chief Financial Officer



|                         |  |                               
|------------------------ |  | ------------------------------
|LNR PROPERTY CORPORATION
|                         | 
|By:                      |  | /s/    SHELLY L. RUBIN        
|                         |  |                               
|                         |  | Shelly L. Rubin Vice President
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 11

                       COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 11
                             ROSLYN BANCORP, INC.
               STATEMENT RE:  COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                     (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AMOUNTS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                            YEAR ENDED
                                                                                          DECEMBER 31, 1997
                                                                                          -----------------
<S>                                                                                       <C>
Net income........................................................................          $    33,390
                                                                                            ===========

Weighted average common shares outstanding........................................           40,159,931

Common stock equivalents due to dilutive effect of stock options..................                    -
                                                                                            -----------

Total weighted average common shares and equivalents outstanding..................           40,159,931
                                                                                            ===========

Basic earnings per common and common share equivalents............................          $      0.83
                                                                                            ===========

Total weighted average common shares and equivalents outstanding..................           40,159,931

Additional dilutive shares using ending period market value versus average
  market value for the period when utilizing the treasury stock method regarding
  stock options...................................................................                    -
                                                                                            -----------

Total shares for fully dilutive earnings per share................................           40,159,931
                                                                                            ===========

Diluted earnings per common and common share equivalents..........................          $      0.83
                                                                                            ===========
</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Bobby Joe HODGES.

No. 35P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 3, 2007.

Daniel F. Read, Durham, for Hodges.

Jane Rankin Thompson, Assistant Attorney General, James C. Gaither, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*371*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd day of January 2007 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of May 2007."
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 577 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 577

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 3903 South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, as the ``Sergeant Henry 
                   Ybarra III Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. SERGEANT HENRY YBARRA III POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 3903 South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Sergeant Henry Ybarra III Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Sergeant 
Henry Ybarra III Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 5, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 577

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 3903 South Congress Avenue in Austin, Texas, as the ``Sergeant Henry 
                   Ybarra III Post Office Building''.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3106 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3106

 To amend chapter 13 of title 17, United States Code (relating to the 
 vessel hull design protection), to clarify the definitions of a hull 
                              and a deck.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 10, 2008

   Mr. Leahy (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Kohl, and Mr. Whitehouse) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend chapter 13 of title 17, United States Code (relating to the 
 vessel hull design protection), to clarify the definitions of a hull 
                              and a deck.

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

SECTION 1. VESSEL HULL DESIGN PROTECTION.

    (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Vessel Hull 
Design Protection Amendments of 2008''.
    (b) Designs Protected.--Section 1301(a) of title 17, United States 
Code, is amended by striking paragraph (2) and inserting the following:
            ``(2) Vessel features.--The design of a vessel hull, deck, 
        or combination of a hull and deck, including a plug or mold, is 
        subject to protection under this chapter, notwithstanding 
        section 1302(4).''.
    (c) Exceptions.--Section 1301(a) of title 17, United States Code, 
is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) Exceptions.--Department of Defense rights in a 
        registered design under this chapter, including the right to 
        build to such registered design, shall be determined solely by 
        operation of section 2320 of title 10, the United States Code, 
        or by the instrument under which the design was developed for 
        the United States Government.''.
    (d) Definitions.--Section 1301(b) of title 17, United States Code, 
is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``vessel hull, including 
        a plug or mold,'' and inserting ``vessel hull or deck, 
        including a plug or mold,'';
            (2) by striking paragraph (4) and inserting the following:
            ``(4) A `hull' is the exterior frame or body of a vessel, 
        exclusive of the deck, superstructure, masts, sails, yards, 
        rigging, hardware, fixtures, and other attachments.''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(7) A `deck' is the horizontal surface of a vessel that 
        covers the hull, including exterior cabin and cockpit surfaces, 
        and exclusive of masts, sails, yards, rigging, hardware, 
        fixtures, and other attachments.''.
                                 <all>
```
MERCER v. HOWARD.

No. COA04-1426.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed December 6, 2005.

Certification Date December 27, 2005.

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
STATE of North Carolina v. Errol Duke MOSES.

No. 574A97-4.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

November 16, 2006.

Kenneth Rose, Durham, for Errol Duke Moses.

*58Steven Arbogast, Special Deputy Attorney General, Thomas J. Keith, District Attorney, for State of NC.

Burton Craige, Raleigh, for North Carolina Academy of Trial.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Defendant on the 29th day of June 2006 in this matter for a writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Forsyth County, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court of that County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 16th day of November 2006."
##### 



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 filing of the Quarterly Report of Paragon Real Estate
Equity and Investment Trust (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period
ending June 30, 2003 (the Report) with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, I, James C. Mastandrea, Chief Executive Officer and I, John J. Dee,
Chief Financial 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 result of operations of the
Company.

|                     |  |                                                 |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                     |  | PARAGON REAL ESTATE EQUITY AND INVESTMENT TRUST
|                     |  | By:                                             |  | /s/ James C. Mastandrea
|                     |  |                                                 |  |                        
|Date: August 5, 2003 |  |                                                 |  | James C. Mastandrea    
|                     |  |                                                 |  | Chief Executive Officer
|                     |  |                                                 |  |                        
|                     |  | PARAGON REAL ESTATE EQUITY AND INVESTMENT TRUST
|                     |  | By:                                             |  | /s/ John J. Dee        
|                     |  |                                                 |  |                        
|Date: August 5, 2003 |  |                                                 |  | John J. Dee            
|                     |  |                                                 |  | Chief Financial Officer

- 1 -
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS
OF SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY, CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                         36,959
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,959
<CGS>                                           22,755
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,755
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,718
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 839
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,656
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,688
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,968
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,968
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .35
        

</TABLE>
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

RICARDO R. CASTILLEJOS,

Petitioner

v.

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT,

Respondent

______________________

2023-1207

______________________

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. SF-0831-17-0586-I-1.

______________________ 

PER CURIAM. 

O R D E R

Having considered all responses from the parties to

this court’s order directing them to address whether this 

court has jurisdiction over Ricardo R. Castillejos’ petition 

for review of a decision from the Merit Systems Protection 

Board, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction. 

Mr. Castillejos’ petition seeks review of the Board’s final September 12, 2022, decision, but this court did not receive his petition until November 22, 2022, 71 days later. 

Under 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A), a petition to review a final 

decision by the Board must be filed “within 60 days after 

Case: 23-1207 Document: 7 Page: 1 Filed: 04/06/2023
2 CASTILLEJOS v. OPM

the Board issues notice of the final . . . decision,” and this 

deadline is mandatory and jurisdictional. Fedora v. Merit 

Sys. Prot. Bd., 848 F.3d 1013, 1016 (Fed. Cir. 2017). It also

“requires actual receipt by the court, not just timely mailing.” Id.; see Fed. R. App. P. 25(a)(2)(A). Because the petition is untimely, we dismiss. 

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The petition for review is dismissed.

(2) Each party shall bear its own costs.

April 6, 2023

 Date

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

 Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court

Case: 23-1207 Document: 7 Page: 2 Filed: 04/06/2023
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 896/2013Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 896/2013 of 18 September 2013 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 896/2013                     

# of 18 September 2013

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 18 September 2013.

*For the Commission, On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
Exhibit 32.2



I, Robert J. Birnbach,  do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C.  1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          1.  The  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-Q  of  DualStar  Technologies
     Corporation  (the "Company") for the period ending  September 30, 2004 (the
     "Quarterly  Report") fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
     or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.  78m or 78o(d))
     and

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


                                            DUALSTAR TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION
                                            (Registrant)

                                            By:/s/ ROBERT BIRNBACH
                                            ------------------------------
                                                  Robert Birnbach
                                            Chief Financial Officer


Dated: February 4, 2005