alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP

767 Fifth Avenue

New York, NY 10153-0119

Exhibit D

Period Fees Budgeted 

Under DIP budget Fees Sought

Petition Date –

February 2019 $3,500,000 $3,133,942.50

March 2019 $3,500,000 $3,035,057.25

April 2019 $3,500,000 $2,953,288.50

Total: $10,500,000 $9,122,288.25

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2988-4 Filed: 07/15/19 Entered: 07/15/19 17:17:14 Page 1

of 1
Exhibit 10.14

Base Salaries of Named Executive Officers

As of May 12, 2006, the following are the current base
salaries of the following named executive officers (as defined in Item 402(a)(3) of Regulation S-K) of Cadmus Communications Corporation:



|                                                    |  |   |         |  
|--------------------------------------------------- |  | - | ------- | -
|Bruce V. Thomas                                     |  | $ | 472,500 |  
|President and Chief Executive Officer               |  |   |         |  
|Wayne B. Luck                                       |  | $ | 214,302 |  
|Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer |  |   |         |  
|Gerard P. Lux, Jr.                                  |  | $ | 300,000 |  
|President, Cadmus Specialty Packaging               |  |   |         |  
|Paul K. Suijk                                       |  | $ | 275,000 | *
|Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   |  |   |         |  

---

|* | effective May 15, 2006
|- | ----------------------

Typically, changes in base salaries of the
named executive officers are determined each October.

Note: Compensation of Stephen E. Hare, the former Executive Vice President and President,
Publisher Services Group, is now governed by the Change in Status Agreement, entered into on April 8, 2006, and filed as Exhibit 10.53 to this report on Form 10-Q.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5106 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in Vallejo, California, as the ‘‘Philmore 

Graham Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 14, 2014 

Mr. THOMPSON of California (for himself, Ms. BASS, Mr. BECERRA, Mr. 

BERA of California, Ms. BROWNLEY of California, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. 

CAMPBELL, Mrs. CAPPS, Mr. CA ́RDENAS, Ms. CHU, Mr. COOK, Mr. 

COSTA, Mrs. DAVIS of California, Mr. DENHAM, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. FARR, 

Mr. GARAMENDI, Ms. HAHN, Mr. HONDA, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. HUNTER, 

Mr. ISSA, Mr. LAMALFA, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. 

LOWENTHAL, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. MCCARTHY of California, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. MCNERNEY, Mrs. NEGRETE MCLEOD, Mr. 

GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mrs. 

NAPOLITANO, Mr. NUNES, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. PETERS of California, Mr. 

ROHRABACHER, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. RUIZ, Mr. 

SCHIFF, Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Ms. LORETTA SANCHEZ

of California, Mr. SHERMAN, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. SWALWELL of California, 

Mr. TAKANO, Mr. VALADAO, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. WATERS, and Mr. WAXMAN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in Vallejo, California, as the ‘‘Philmore Graham Post Office Building’’. 

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


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5106 IH

1 SECTION 1. PHILMORE GRAHAM POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 100 Admiral Callaghan Lane in 

4 Vallejo, California, shall be known and designated as the 

5 ‘‘Philmore Graham Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Philmore Graham 

10 Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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  amended  Quarterly  Report  of  Applied  DNA
Sciences,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30,
2006, as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof
(the  "Report"),  I, James  Hayward,  Chief  Executive  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; and

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



                                                     /s/  JAMES A. HAYWARD
                                                     ---------------------
                                                     James A. Hayward
                                                     Principal Financial Officer
                                                     October 10, 2006
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5079 

To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to provide for the repatriation of unaccompanied 

alien children, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 11, 2014 

Mr. CALVERT (for himself, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. COOK, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. 

ROYCE, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. ISSA, 

Mr. NUNES, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mr. LAMALFA, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. RIGELL, 

Mr. HECK of Nevada, Mr. STIVERS, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. JOYCE, 

Mr. FARENTHOLD, and Mr. COLE) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 to provide for the 

repatriation of unaccompanied alien children, 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, 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5079 IH

1 SECTION 1. REPATRIATION OF UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN 

2 CHILDREN. 

3 Section 235(a) of the William Wilberforce Trafficking 

4 Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (8 U.S.C. 

5 1232(a)) is amended— 

6 (1) in paragraph (2)— 

7 (A) by amending the heading to read as 

8 follows: ‘‘RULES FOR UNACCOMPANIED ALIEN

9 CHILDREN.’’; 

10 (B) in subparagraph (A), in the matter 

11 preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘who is a na12 tional or habitual resident of a country that is 

13 contiguous with the United States’’; and 

14 (C) in subparagraph (C)— 

15 (i) by amending the heading to read 

16 as follows: ‘‘AGREEMENTS WITH FOREIGN

17 COUNTRIES.’’; and 

18 (ii) in the matter preceding clause (i), 

19 by striking ‘‘countries contiguous to the 

20 United States’’ and inserting ‘‘any foreign 

21 country that the Secretary determines ap22 propriate’’; and 

23 (2) in paragraph (5)(D), in the matter pre24 ceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘, except for an unac25 companied alien child from a contiguous country 

26 subject to the exceptions under subsection (a)(2),’’ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5079 IH

1 and inserting ‘‘who does not meet the criteria listed 

2 in paragraph (2)(A)’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Patrick McGowan, Respondent, v. Henry Zenner, Appellant.

Order modified as directed in opinion and affirmed as modified, without costs to either party.

Opinion by

Brady, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,192,426
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (99,104)
<INVENTORY>                                    163,337
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,318,948
<PP&E>                                       4,681,212
<DEPRECIATION>                              (4,045,874)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,013,312
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,529,871
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     4,112,947
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                  (2,737,521)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,013,312
<SALES>                                      1,358,803
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,358,803
<CGS>                                          818,215
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  818,215
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              26,870
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,103
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             12,103
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    12,103
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 97 (Thursday, May 20, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28234-28235]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12309]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

DATE AND TIME: Friday, May 28, 2010; 11:30 a.m. EDT.

PLACE: Via Teleconference, Public Dial In: 1-800-597-7623, Conference 
ID <greek-i> 76198308.

Meeting Agenda

    This meeting is open to the public, except where noted otherwise.
    I. Approval of Agenda
    II. State Advisory Committee Issues
    <bullet> Colorado SAC
    <bullet> Oregon SAC
    <bullet> Consideration of Additional Nominee to the New Jersey SAC
    III. Program Planning
    <bullet> Approval of Briefing Report on Health Care Disparities
    <bullet> Approval of Findings & Recommendations on Educational 
Effectiveness of Historically Black Colleges & Universities Briefing 
Report
    <bullet> Approval of 2011 Business Meeting Calendar
    <bullet> Update on Status of NBPP Enforcement Report--Some of the 
discussion of this agenda item may be held in closed session.
    <bullet> Update on Status of Title IX Project--Some of the 
discussion of this

[[Page 28235]]

agenda item may be held in closed session.
    <bullet> Discussion of Briefing Concept Paper on Attack against 
Asian-American Students at South Philadelphia High School
    IV. Adjourn

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, Public 
Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591. TDD: (202) 376-8116.
    Persons with a disability requiring special services, such as an 
interpreter for the hearing impaired, should contact Pamela Dunston at 
least seven days prior to the meeting at 202-376-8105. TDD: (202) 376-
8116.

    Dated: May 18, 2010.
David Blackwood,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2010-12309 Filed 5-18-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
Entered on Docket 

February 05, 2019

EDWARD J. EMMONS, CLERK 

U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 302 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 14:50:27 Page 1 of 2
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 302 Filed: 02/05/19 Entered: 02/05/19 14:50:27 Page 2 of 2
#### Abraham R. Van Nest, Appellant, v. The Mayor, etc., of the City of New York, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Opinion by

Daniels, J.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 10, 2021

No. 04-20-00063-CR, 04-20-00064-CR, 04-20-00065-CR 

David M. MURPHY,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR4881, 2018CR4882, 2018CR4883

Honorable Jefferson Moore, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Chief Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice 

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice

Appellant’s motion for en banc reconsideration is DENIED. 

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 10th day of September, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           7,538
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  161,498
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,611
<INVENTORY>                                     94,776
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               305,820
<PP&E>                                         616,612
<DEPRECIATION>                                 237,901
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 953,748
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          392,758
<BONDS>                                             42
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,589
<OTHER-SE>                                     264,782
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   953,748
<SALES>                                        828,873
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               828,873
<CGS>                                          721,369
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  755,277
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,964
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              29,853
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 51,632
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22,244
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             29,388
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    29,388
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.16


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-6703

DWIGHT ALEXANDER RUDISILL, 

Petitioner - Appellant, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Respondent - Appellee. 

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

Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:22-mc-00015-MR-WCM) 

Submitted: September 22, 2022 Decided: September 27, 2022

Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges. 

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Dwight Alexander Rudisill, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6703 Doc: 5 Filed: 09/27/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM: 

Dwight Alexander Rudisill appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 27(a) petition to perpetuate testimony. After reviewing the record, we conclude 

that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the unverified petition because 

Rudisill failed to show an immediate need to perpetuate testimony to prevent it from being 

lost. See Deiulemar Compagnia Di Navigazione S.p.A. v. M/V Allegra, 198 F.3d 473, 479, 

484-85 & n.16 (4th Cir. 1999) (stating standard of review and addressing showing 

petitioner must make). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order on this basis. 

Rudisill v. United States, No. 1:22-mc-00015-MR-WCM (W.D.N.C. May 26, 2022). 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-6703 Doc: 5 Filed: 09/27/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
Exhibit 12

MASCOTECH, INC.
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and
Preferred Stock Dividends
(Dollars in thousands)

<TABLE>

                                9 Months 
                                  Ended    
                               Sept. 30,            For The Years Ended December 31        
                                  1997      1996      1995       1994      1993      1992  

<S>                             <C>       <C>        <C>      <C>        <C>        <C>
Earnings (Loss) Before Income
  Taxes and Fixed Charges:

  Income (loss) from continuing
    operations before income
    taxes (credit), 
    extraordinary item and     
    cumulative effect of    
    accounting change, net..... $158,660  $ 77,220  $100,280  $(264,490) $121,180  $ 68,250 

  Deduct equity in
    undistributed earnings
    of less-than-fifty-
    percent owned companies....  (35,400)  (31,650)  (29,590)   (23,350)  (19,930)  (21,760)
  Add interest on
    indebtedness, net..........   29,370    30,350    51,500     51,290    83,000    87,830
  Add amortization of debt
    expense....................      650     1,490     1,670      3,450     4,390     1,930
  Estimated interest factor
    for rentals................    1,530     6,350     7,070      6,220     5,550     5,740
  Earnings (loss) before income
    taxes and fixed charges.... $154,810  $ 83,760  $130,930  $(226,880) $194,190  $141,990

Fixed Charges:

  Interest on indebtedness,
    net........................ $ 29,460  $ 30,590  $ 51,690  $  51,540  $ 83,110  $ 87,980
  Amortization of debt
    expense....................      650     1,490     1,670      3,450     4,390     1,930
  Estimated interest factor
    for rentals................    1,530     6,350     7,070      6,220     5,550     5,740

      Total fixed charges......   31,640    38,430    60,430     61,210    93,050    95,650

  Preferred stock dividend
    requirement (a)............   10,320    21,570    21,970     14,630    25,860    17,140

  Combined fixed charges and
    preferred stock dividends.. $ 41,960  $ 60,000  $ 82,400  $  75,840  $118,910  $112,790

Ratio of earnings to
  fixed charges................   4.9       2.2       2.2         -- (b)   2.1       1.5   

Ratio of earnings to combined
  fixed charges and preferred
  stock dividends..............   3.7       1.4       1.6         -- (c)   1.6       1.3   




  (a) Represents amount of income before provision for income taxes required to meet the preferred stock dividend requirements
      of the Company and its 50% owned companies.
  (b) 1994 results of operations are inadequate to cover fixed charges by $288,090.
  (c) 1994 results of operations are inadequate to cover combined fixed charges and preferred stock dividends by $302,720.
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of MidSouth Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2011 (the “Report”), I, C.R. Cloutier, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify that:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





/s/ C. R. Cloutier


C.R. Cloutier


Chief Executive Officer


May 9, 2011
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-22-00072-CV

Transverse, LLC, Appellant

v.

Mark Swanholm, Appellee

FROM THE 201ST DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

NO. D-1-GN-21-007057, THE HONORABLE AMY CLARK MEACHUM, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant Transverse, LLC has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss this appeal. 

We grant appellant’s motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a).

__________________________________________

Chari L. Kelly, Justice

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Kelly and Smith

Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion

Filed: April 27, 2022
H. R. 5108 

One Hundred Thirteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and fourteen 

An Act 

To establish the Law School Clinic Certification Program of the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. USPTO LAW SCHOOL CLINIC CERTIFICATION PROGRAM. 

(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Law School Clinic Certification Program of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, as implemented by the Office, is established as a program entitled the 

‘‘Law School Clinic Certification Program’’. The Program shall allow 

students enrolled in a participating law school’s clinic to practice 

patent and trademark law before the Office by drafting, filing, 

and prosecuting patent or trademark applications, or both, on a 

pro-bono basis for clients that qualify for assistance from the law 

school’s clinic. The Director shall establish regulations and procedures for application to and participation in the Program. All law 

schools accredited by the American Bar Association are eligible 

for participation in the Program, and shall be examined for acceptance using identical criteria established by the Director. The Program shall be in effect for the 10-year period beginning on the 

date of the enactment of this Act. 

(b) REPORT ON THE PROGRAM.—The Director shall, not later 

than the last day of the 2-year period beginning on the date of 

the enactment of this Act, submit to the Committees on the 

Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Senate a report 

on the Program, describing the number of law schools and law 

students participating in the Program, the work done through the 

Program, the benefits of the Program, and any recommendations 

of the Director for modifications to the Program. 

(c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

(1) OFFICE.—The term ‘‘Office’’ means the United States 

Patent and Trademark Office. 

(2) PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘Program’’ means the Law School 

Clinic Certification Program established in subsection (a). 
H. R. 5108—2 

(3) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means the Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of 

the United States Patent and Trademark Office. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.