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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4793 

To designate the library and archives gallery at the Washington’s Headquarters Museum at Morristown National Historical Park in the State 

of New Jersey, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 9, 2010 

Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To designate the library and archives gallery at the Washington’s Headquarters Museum at Morristown National Historical Park in the State of New Jersey, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS. 

4 Congress finds that— 

5 (1) in 1933, Lloyd W. Smith was instrumental 

6 in the establishment of the Nation’s first national 

7 historical park, Morristown National Historical 

8 Park, in Morristown, New Jersey, with his donation 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4793 IH

1 of much of the land for the Jockey Hollow Unit of 

2 the park; 

3 (2) in 1955, upon his death, his extensive li4 brary and archival collection was donated to Morris5 town National Historical Park, provided that an ap6 propriate building was constructed to house the col7 lection; 

8 (3) in 1957, a new library wing to the Washing9 ton’s Headquarters Museum was built to house the 

10 collections; 

11 (4) in 2007, a new and larger library wing was 

12 added to the museum to better preserve and display 

13 the extensive collection, and the former library wing 

14 of the museum was converted to an archives gallery; 

15 and 

16 (5) Lloyd W. Smith’s significant contributions 

17 to the establishment of the Morristown National 

18 Historical Park and to the establishment of the re19 nowned library with an extensive archives collection 

20 should be recognized. 

21 SEC. 2. DESIGNATION OF LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES GAL22 LERY AT THE WASHINGTON’S HEAD23 QUARTERS MUSEUM. 

24 (a) DESIGNATION.—The library and archives gallery 

25 located in the Washington’s Headquarters Museum at 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4793 IH

1 Morristown National Historical Park shall be known and 

2 designated as the ‘‘Lloyd W. Smith Library’’ and the 

3 ‘‘Lloyd W. Smith Archives Gallery’’, respectively. 

4 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg5 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

6 States to the library and archives gallery at the Washing7 ton’s Headquarters Museum referred to in subsection (a) 

8 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lloyd W. Smith 

9 Library’’ and the ‘‘Lloyd W. Smith Archives Gallery’’, re10 spectively. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Bumgardner, Kelsey and Senior Judge Hodges 

GRACE C. RUTLEDGE 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION*

v. Record No. 1961-02-4 PER CURIAM 

 FEBRUARY 19, 2003 

E. PRESTON RUTLEDGE 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ARLINGTON COUNTY 

Paul F. Sheridan, Judge 

 (Mary Elizabeth Davis; Hofheimer/Ferrebee, 

P.C., on brief), for appellant. 

 (Martin A. Gannon; James Ray Cottrell; 

David H. Fletcher; Christopher W. Schinstock; 

Kyle F. Bartol; Gannon & Cottrell, P.C., on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Grace C. Rutledge (mother) appeals the decision of the 

circuit court denying her motion for unsupervised visitation with 

the parties' minor son, Andrew Rutledge, and court-ordered 

therapy. On appeal, mother contends the trial court denied her 

due process and substantial justice by dismissing her motion 

without a hearing. Upon reviewing the record and the parties' 

briefs, we conclude that this appeal is without merit. 

Accordingly, we summarily affirm the decision of the trial court. 

See Rule 5A:27. 

 

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, this opinion is not 

designated for publication.
Background

 Mother and E. Preston Rutledge (father) were divorced by 

final decree on February 27, 1997. In a May 10, 2000 order, 

father was awarded sole legal and physical custody of Andrew. 

The court allowed mother supervised visitation with Andrew on 

alternate Sunday afternoons through the Visitation Services 

Program of Northern Virginia Family Service, until further order 

of the court. On June 7, 2002, mother moved the court for 

unsupervised visitation and court-ordered therapy. After 

considering mother's written motion and father's written 

opposition, the court denied mother's motion. 

 Mother acknowledges she was informed of the court's denial 

of her motion on June 26, 2002. Mother failed to file a motion 

to reconsider or any other form of objection to the court's 

ruling. 

Analysis

 This Court will not consider an argument on appeal that was 

not presented to the trial court. Ohree v. Commonwealth, 26 

Va. App. 299, 308, 494 S.E.2d 484, 488 (1998); Rule 5A:18. The 

requirements of Rule 5A:18 apply equally to constitutional 

claims. Deal v. Commonwealth, 15 Va. App. 157, 161, 421 S.E.2d 

897, 900 (1992). "The goal of the contemporaneous objection 

rule is to avoid unnecessary appeals, reversals and mistrials by 

allowing the trial judge to intelligently consider an issue and, 

if necessary, to take corrective action." Campbell v. 

- 2 -
Commonwealth, 12 Va. App. 476, 480, 405 S.E.2d 1, 2 (1991). 

Appellant failed to voice her objections before the trial court 

at any time. 

 Accordingly, Rule 5A:18 bars our consideration of this 

question on appeal. Moreover, the record does not reflect any 

reason to invoke the good cause or ends of justice exceptions to 

Rule 5A:18. Therefore, we summarily affirm the decision of the 

trial court. See Rule 5A:27. 

Affirmed.

- 3 -
Exhibit 32.2  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 Quarterly Report of StrikeForce Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Philip E. Blocker, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001, that:   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated: August 22, 2011  /s/ Philip E. Blocker Philip E. Blocker Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the use of our report dated March 26, 2002, included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of CompuCredit Corporation and
subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2001, with respect to the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K.

We
also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-62012) pertaining to the CompuCredit Corporation
2000 Stock Option Plan, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-78409) pertaining to the CompuCredit Corporation Amended and Restated 1998 Stock Option
Plan and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-92889) pertaining to the CompuCredit Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan of our report dated
March 26, 2002, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of CompuCredit Corporation and subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2001.



Atlanta,
Georgia
March 1, 2004

---

QuickLinks
================================================================================

Exhibit 32.2


                            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  Quarterly  Report  of  Mondial  Ventures,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned,  in the  capacities  and  on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

     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.


Date:  June 21, 2006


/s/ Joe Alvaro
---------------------------------------
Joe Alvaro, Principal Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONATE

# ED PR 06-0422 IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF LINDA A.BURROWS 

## OCT 1 3 2020 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State ot Montana ORDER Linda A.Burrows has petitioned the Court to waive the three-year test requirement for the Multistate Professional Responsibility Examination (MPRE)for purposes ofher application for admission by motion to the State Bar ofMontana. By rule, applicants for admission by motion must provide evidence of the requisite score on an MPRE taken "within three years preceding the date of the application for admission." Rule IV.A.3, Rulesof Admission. Burrowspassed the MPRE in 2000when seeking licensuretopractice law in the State ofCalifornia, where she was admitted. Burrows has since practiced law for 13 years "without any ethical or disciplinary issues in any jurisdiction where licensed or where admittedpro hac vice." Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition of Linda A. Burrows to waive the three-year test requirement for the MPRE for purposes of her current application for admission by motion to the State Bar ofMontana is GRANTED. The Clerk shall mail a copy ofthis order to Petitioner and to the Administrator of the Board ofBar Examiners at the State Bar ofMontana. DATED this 1 3 —

day ofOctober,2020.
ChiefJustice 4. 10/13/2020

Case Number: PR 06-0422

# g-;/ 2-IL
STATE v. Noui PHACHOUMPHONE

65PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

October 11, 2018

William D. Spence, Attorney at Law, Kinston, for Phachoumphone, Noui.

M. Elizabeth Guzman, Assistant Attorney General, Mike Miller, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 10th of October 2018 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 11th of October 2018."

*694Defendant shall have up to and including the 21st day of November 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
Exhibit 10.3(b)

COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION

EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN

FIRST AMENDMENT

This FIRST AMENDMENT
(this Amendment) to the CompuCredit Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the Plan) is made by the Compensation Committee (the Committee) of the Board of Directors pursuant to and in
accordance with Section 7.9 of the Plan and the duly adopted resolutions of Committee dated November 5, 2004. This Amendment shall be effective as of the date the Plan was originally adopted.



|1. | Section 3.2(A) of the Plan is deleted in its entirety and shall be replaced with the following:
|-- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A. ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEE DEFINED. Except as otherwise required by Code Section 423 or other
applicable law, including, without limitation, securities laws of a foreign jurisdiction applicable to such Employee, an Employee shall be considered an Eligible Employee for purposes of participation in the Plan as of the first Offering
Commencement Date after Employee completes thirty calendar days of continuous service with the Company. In addition, each Employee employed by the Company on the Effective Date (as defined in Section 7.8) will be considered an Eligible
Employee. For purposes of the Plan, the employment relationship shall be treated as continuing intact while the individual is on sick leave or other leave of absence approved by the Company. Where the period of leave exceeds ninety (90) days
and the individuals right to reemployment is not guaranteed either by statute or by contract, the employment relationship shall be deemed to have terminated on the ninety-first (91st) day of such leave.



|2. | Except as amended hereby, the terms of the Plan are not otherwise changed and the Plan shall continue in full force and effect.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AS ADOPTED BY THE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF COMPUCREDIT CORPORATION ON NOVEMBER 5, 2004.



COMPUCREDIT CORPORATIONBy:

/S/ ROHIT H. KIRPALANIRohit H. Kirpalani General Counsel and
Secretary
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 6 A1 66 6 . RANDY EDW ARDS v

. THE STATE.

On Ap ri l 2 5

, 2 01 6

, p l ai n t i ff Ran dy Ed w ard s , an i n d i g en t pri s o n er pro ceed i n g
p ro se, fi l ed t hi s d i rect ap p eal fro m t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er d en y i n g hi s ap p l icat i o n fo r

an arres t w arran t in t h i s ci vi l act i o n

. Th e o rd er ap p eal ed fro m was en tered on M arch

4 , 2 01 6 . W e l ack ju ri s d i ct i o n fo r t wo reas o n s

.
Fi rs t

, b ecau s e Ed w ard s i s i n carcerat ed

, h is ap p eal is co n t ro l l ed b y t h e Pri so n Li t i gat i o n Refo rm Ac t o f 1 9 9 6

, OCGA § 4 2 -1 2 -1 et seq

. Un d er OCGA § 4 2 -1 2 -8

,
an ap peal o f a ci v il act i o n fi l ed b y a p ri s on er “ sh al l b e as p ro v id ed i n Co d e Sect i o n 5 -6 -3 5 .” An d u n d er OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5

, t h e p a r t y wi s hi n g t o ap p eal m u s t fi l e an

a p p l i cat i o n fo r di s cret io n ary ap p eal t o t h e ap p ro p ri at e ap p el l at e co u rt

. Beca u s e a
p ri s o n er h as n o ri g h t o f d i rect ap p eal i n ci vi l cas es , we lack ju ri s d i ct i o n t o co n s i d er
t h i s d irect ap p eal

. See Jo n es v. To wn s en d

, 2 6 7 Ga. 4 8 9

, 4 9 0 (4 8 0 SE2 d 2 4 ) (1 9 9 7 ).

S e c o n d

, e v e n i f Ed w a r d s h a d a r i g h t o f d i r e c t a p p e a l h e r e , t h i s a p p e a l i s

u n t i m el y

. A n ot i ce o f ap peal m u s t b e fi l ed wi t h in 3 0 d ay s o f en t ry of th e t ri al co u rt

o rd er s o u g h t t o b e ap p eal ed

. OCGA § 5 -6 -3 8 (a). Th e p ro p er an d t i m el y fi l i n g o f a

n o t i ce o f ap p eal is an ab s o l u t e req u i rem en t t o co n fer ju ri sd i ct i o n o n t h is Co u rt

. Ro wl a n d v. S t at e , 2 64 Ga. 8 7 2

, 8 7 2 (1 ) (4 5 2 SE2 d 7 5 6 ) (1 9 9 5 ). H ere, Ed ward s fi l ed
h i s n o t i ce o f ap p eal 5 2 d ay s aft er en t ry o f t h e t ri al co urt o rd er h e s eek s t o ap p eal

.

Fo r t h e ab o v e reas o ns , t h i s ap p eal i s hereb y DISM ISSED fo r l ack o f ju ri s d i ct i o n

.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 06/29/2016 June 29, 2016
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I,
J.Paul Whitehead III, certify that:

1.     I
have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of CompuCredit Corporation;

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;

3.     Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report;

4.     The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant and we have:



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



Date:
March 1, 2004

| |  | /s/J. PAUL WHITEHEAD, IIIJ. Paul Whitehead, III Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Omeros Corporation;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;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this 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 report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) 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 registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant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; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize, and
report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 Dated: May 12, 2010/s/ Gregory A. DemopulosGregory A. Demopulos, M.D.Principal Executive Officer
#### A. H. Burket, *Appellant,*v. Frank A. Bryan, as Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Broward County, Florida; and Sun Land Company, a Corporation, *Appellees.*

Division B.

Decision Filed April 27, 1928.

*W. W. Whitehurst*and *Walter Lee Johnson,*for Appellant;

No appearance for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the order herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said order; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Sherman BURTON.

No. 2003-K-0696.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 5, 2003.

In re Burton, Sherman;—Defendant; Applying for Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div, C, No. 407-530; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2002-KA-1854.

Denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 24
- 0081 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, vs. MARCUS JOHN AZURE,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 3 , 202 4 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 29 2024

05/29/2024

Case Number: DA 24-0081
TREJO v. NC DEPARTMENT OF STATE TREASURER RETIREMENT SYSTEM DIVISION

420P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 9, 2018

Ms. Susannah P. Holloway, Assistant Attorney General, Ms. M.A. Kelly Chambers, Special Deputy Attorney General, Mr. James W. Doggett, Deputy Solicitor General, for NC Department of State Treasurer Retirement Systems Division

Mr. Branch W. Vincent, III, Southern Shores, Mr. John R. Taylor, Mr. Robert E. Zaytoun, Mr. Matthew D. Ballew, Raleigh, Attorneys at Law, For Trejo, Stephanie T.

Mr. M. Jackson Nichols, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for State Employees Association of North Carolina, Inc.

*853The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 21st of February 2018 by State Employees Association of North Carolina Inc. and for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief in Support of Petition for Discretionary Review:

"Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of May 2018."
#### J. F. White, *Appellant,*v. Domingo Pasaron, Trustee for Himself et al., and Domingo Pasaron, et al., *Appellees.*

En Banc.

Decision Filed March 8, 1928.

*Watson, Gaines & Saussy*and *Harry G. Sabine,*for Appellant ;

*Macfarlane, Pettingill, Macfarlcme & Fowler,*for Appellees.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the orders herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there *410is no error in. the said orders; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said orders of the Circuit Court be, and the same are hereby affirmed.

Ellis, C. J., and Wi-iitfield, Terrell, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.