alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 101 (Wednesday, May 26, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29591-29592]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12554]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Notice of Exempt; OMB Control No. 3235-0452; SEC File No. 270-396; 
Preliminary Roll-Up Communication]


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

Upon Written Request; Copies Available From: Securities and Exchange 
Commission, Office of Investor Education and Advocacy, Washington, DC 
20549-0213.

Extension: Notice of Exempt, OMB Control No. 3235-0452, SEC File No. 
270-396, Preliminary Roll-Up Communication.

    Notice is hereby given that, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission'') has submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget this request for extension of the previously approved 
collection of information discussed below.
    A Notice of Exempt Preliminary Roll-Up Communication (``Notice'') 
(17 CFR 240.14a-104) provides information regarding ownership interests 
and any potential conflicts of interest to be included in statements 
submitted by or on behalf of a person pursuant Exchange Act Rule (17 
CFR 240.14a-2(b)(4)) and Exchange Act Rule (17 CFR 240.14a-6(n)). The 
Notice is filed on occasion and the information required is

[[Page 29592]]

mandatory. All information is provided to the public upon request. The 
Notice takes approximately 0.25 hours per response and is filed by 4 
respondents for a total of one annual burden hour.
    An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required 
to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a 
currently valid control number.
    Written comments regarding the above information should be directed 
to the following persons: (i) Desk Officer for the Securities and 
Exchange Commission, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget, Room 10102, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503 or send an e-mail to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f5a69d949280938194aab49d989091b59a9897db909a85db929a83"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8edde6efe9fbe8faefd1cfe6e3ebeacee1e3eca0ebe1fea0e9e1f8">[email protected]</span></a>; and (ii) Charles Boucher, Director/CIO, Securities 
and Exchange Commission, C/O Shirley Martinson, 6432 General Green Way, 
Alexandria, VA 22312; or send an e-mail to: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#a3f3f1e2fceec2cacfc1ccdbe3d0c6c08dc4ccd5"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="eebebcafb1a38f87828c8196ae9d8b8dc0898198">[email protected]</span></a>. 
Comments must be submitted to OMB within 30 days of this notice.

    Dated: May 19, 2010.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-12554 Filed 5-25-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8010-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Silas F. Overton, Respondent, v. Emily F. Barclay and Others, Defendants; William H. Hall (Purchaser), Appellant.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.—

Per Curiam:

The purchaser’s objection to taking title is founded on the claim that service of the order, appointing a guardian *ad l tem*for the defendant, an infant over fourteen years of age, unless within twenty days she should procure one to be appointed, was not made. The order was not personally served upon her because she could not be found, and subsequently the plaintiff caused a petition to be presented to the court, in wnich it was stated, among other things, that the infant secreted herself to avoid service. Thereupon an order for substituted service was made. And the purchaser argues that the provisions of the order in respect to manner of service were not complied with. That it required two things to be done: *"First,*that the order appointing the guardian and the order for substituted service should both be left at the residence of the infant with some person of proper age. Second, that copies oi both orders be deposited in the post office. ” It is true that the orders were not deposited in the post office, and if the purchaser is right in his claim that the order required it to be done his position would be well taken. But we do not so read it. The provision for service of the order upon a person of proper age at the residence of the infant was by the order made sufficient. Only in the event of the failure to make such service was the alternative of affixing the orders to the outer door and mailing them provided for. The papers were served at the residence of the infant upon her mother, and thus the order was complied with. The order should be affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements.

Present — Van Brunt, P. J., O’Brien and Parker, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 31.3**CERTIFICATIONI, Kevin Murphy, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of SteelCloud, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements weremade, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial 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 forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially 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 ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.     Date: June 13, 2007 By: /s/ Kevin Murphy       Name: Kevin Murphy  Title: Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information from the Balance
Sheet, and Statement of Income, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         12,400
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          4,556
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               12,669
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                    0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     1,123
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          6,778
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            1,123
<LOANS>                                       156,167
<ALLOWANCE>                                     1,893
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                197,247
<DEPOSITS>                                    182,821
<SHORT-TERM>                                        0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           695,000
<LONG-TERM>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<COMMON>                                        8,310
<OTHER-SE>                                      5,421
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 13,731
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                10,810
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 834
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                  223
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               11,867
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              5,210
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              5,210
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           6,657
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      59
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 4,605
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 2,956
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      2,956
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                    1,696
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.13
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.13
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                   5.29
<LOANS-NON>                                       846
<LOANS-PAST>                                      613
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                    0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                   613
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                1,676
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      59
<RECOVERIES>                                        2
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               1,893
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            1,893
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                           179
        


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________ No. 95-20954 Conference Calendar

__________________ SAMUEL CITIZEN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus GEORGE W. BUSH, Governor; WAYNE SCOTT, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division, Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. CA H 95-4441

- - - - - - - - - - August 22, 1996 Before KING, DUHÉ, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas prisoner Samuel Citizen, # 664839, appeals the district court's dismissal of his complaint seeking injunctive and monetary relief based on the implementation of an allegedly unconstitutional bill enacted by the Texas Legislature. Because Citizen alleges no actual injury, he lacks standing to invokeNo. 95-20954 -2- federal jurisdiction. See Lewis v. Casey , 116 S. Ct. 2174, 2179- 80 & n.1 (1996); Society of Separationists, Inc. v. Herman , 959 F.2d 1283, 1285 (5th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied , 113 S. Ct. 191 (1992). APPEAL DISMISSED.
Unassociated Document


    Exhibit
10.1

     

    Capital
Gold Corporation

     

    2006
Equity Incentive Plan

     

    Amendment
2009-1

     

    1.          The Section entitled
“Exercise of Awards.” is amended to add a new sentence at the end thereof to
read as follows:

    


    “Notwithstanding
the foregoing, payment of the option exercise price may be made (i) in cash or
by check payable to the Company, (ii) in shares of Common Stock duly owned by
the Optionholder (and for which the Optionholder has good title free and clear
of any liens and encumbrances), valued at the Fair Market Value on the date of
exercise, or (iii) by delivery back to the Company from the shares acquired on
exercise of the number of shares of Common Stock equal to the exercise price,
valued at the Fair Market Value on the date of exercise.

     

    2.             All other terms and
provisions of the Plan shall remain in full force and
effect.

     

    Executed
this 23rd day of
July, 2009.

     

     

    


    
      
        	 	Capital Gold
      Corporation	 
	 	 	 	 
	
              	
                By:
      

              	/s/
      Gifford Dieterle	 
	 	Name:  	
                Gifford
      Dieterle

              	 
	 	Title:   	President
#### FRED M. PARRISH et al. v. CHARLES E. HARTMAN et al.

(Filed 13 October, 1937.)

1. Appeal and Error § 10b—

The allowance by the judge of the Superior Court of appellee’s motion to strike out appellant’s purported statement of case on appeal is without error upon the court’s finding that the statement of case on appeal was not filed within the time allowed.

2. Appeal and Error § 31b—

Failure to have a statement of case on appeal does not *ipso facto*work a dismissal, but the Supreme Court may review the record proper for errors appearing upon its face.

3. Judgments § 17b—

AVhere the verdict establishes defendant’s indebtedness to plaintiff, but does not award interest, a judgment for the indebtedness with interest from the date the indebtedness was incurred is in excess of the verdict and will be modified to conform to the verdict.

Appeal by defendants from *Clement, J.,*at December Term, 1936, of Yadkikt.

Civil action to recover of Charles E. Hartman the sum of $2,500 with interest, and to have the same declared a lien on certain lands in Yadkin County.

The jury returned the following verdict :

“1. Is C. E. Hartman the owner of the land described in the complaint in fee simple? Answer: ‘Yes.’

“2. What sum is C. E. Hartman indebted to the plaintiffs ? Answer: '$2,500.’

“3. Is said sum a charge upon the lands, as alleged in the complaint? Answer: 'Yes.’ ”

The verdict appears on the record three times, twice as above, and once with the second issue answered: “$2,’500, with interest from 31 January, 1933.”

*249In tbe judgment it is decreed that “the said $2,500, with interest from '5 January, 1933, be and the same is hereby adjudged a charge and lien on the lands above referred to.”

The defendants gave notice of appeal in open court, and were allowed 40 days to prepare and serve their statement of case on appeal. The trial term of court adjourned 17 December, 1936, and appellants’ statement of case on appeal was served 4 February, 1937. The judge finds as a fact that appellants’ “Case” was not served within the time allowed, and, upon motion of appellees, ordered that the same be stricken from the file of the papers in the case. From this ruling, defendants also appeal.

*Parrish & Beal for plaintiffs, appellees.*

*Grant & Grant for defendants, appellants.*

Stacy, C. J.

The order striking out defendants’ purported statement of case on appeal, because not served in time, is supported by a long line of decisions, of which *S. v. Moore,*210 N. C., 686, 188 S. E., 421, may be cited as the most recent. The failure to have a “case on appeal,” however, does not *ipso facto*work a dismissal. *Roberts v. Bus Co.,*198 N. C., 779, 153 S. E., 398. *Non constat*that error may not appear on the face o'f the record proper. *Edwards v. Perry,*208 N. C., 252, 179 S. E., 892; *Wallace v. Salisbury,*147 N. C., 58, 60 S. E., 713.

Here; error does appear on the face of the record proper. The judgment is in excess of the verdict in its award of interest on the recovery. This will be modified so as to conform with the verdict as it appears of record in the Superior Court of Yancey County.

Modified and affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

SECTION 1350CERTIFICATION

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Northwest AirlinesCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Bernard L. Han, Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

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

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Bernard  L. Han                                    |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                   |
| Bernard L.  Han                                        |
| Executive  Vice President and  Chief Financial Officer |
| October 28,  2004                                      |

 

----
1

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re: 

PG&E CORPORATION,

 - and -

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC 

COMPANY,

Debtors.

 Affects PG&E Corporation 

 Affects Pacific Gas and Electric Company 

: Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in the Lead Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM). 

Chapter 11

Case No. 19-30088 (DM)

(Jointly Administered)

Objection Deadline December 24, 2019 @ 4:00 p.m. 

(ET)

AMENDED MONTHLY STAFFING AND COMPENSATION

REPORT OF AP SERVICES, LLC FOR THE PERIOD

FROM OCTOBER 1, 2019 THROUGH OCTOBER 31, 2019

In accordance with the Order Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 363(b) and 105(a) Authorizing the 

Debtors to Employ and Retain AP Services, LLC to provide a Chief Restructuring Officer, Deputy 

Chief Restructuring Officer and additional personnel for the Debtors Nunc Pro Tunc to the Petition 

Date [Docket No. 1299], on December 3, 2019, AP Services, LLC (“APS”) submitted its Monthly 

Staffing and Compensation Report (“Monthly Report”) for the period of October 1, 2019 through 

October 31, 2019 (the “Compensation Period”) [Docket No. 4958].

APS hereby amends the Monthly Report to correct a clerical error on page two (2) as reflected 

in the within Amended Monthly Staffing and Compensation Report (the “Amended Monthly Report”).

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5010 Filed: 12/06/19 Entered: 12/06/19 11:09:37 Page 1 of

3
2

During the Compensation Period, APS incurred $5,425,311.00 in fees and $642,335.19 in 

expenses for a total amount of $6,067,646.19, as reflected in the attached exhibits.

Dated: December 6, 2019 AP SERVICES, LLC

865 S Figueroa Street, Suite 2310

Los Angeles, CA 90017

By: John Boken

 Managing Director

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5010 Filed: 12/06/19 Entered: 12/06/19 11:09:37 Page 2 of

3
3

EXHIBITS

Annexed hereto are the following exhibits for the Amended Monthly Staffing and Compensation 

Report of AP Services, LLC for the Period from October 1, 2019 through October 31, 2019

Exhibit A - Summary of Compensation and Expenses

Exhibit B - Summary of Fees and Hours by Professionals and 

 Description of Responsibilities of Professionals

Exhibit C - Summary of Expenses

 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 5010 Filed: 12/06/19 Entered: 12/06/19 11:09:37 Page 3 of

3
Agreement of Substitution and Amendment of Shareholder Rights Agent Agreement



 Exhibit 4.2 
 AGREEMENT OF SUBSTITUTION AND AMENDMENT OF 
 SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS AGREEMENT 
 This Agreement of Substitution and Amendment is entered into effective as of November 1, 2002, by and between CIRCOR International, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”) and American Stock Transfer and Trust Company, a New York banking corporation (“AST”). 
 RECITALS 
  

	A.	On or about September 16, 1999, the Company entered into a Shareholder Rights Agreement (the “Rights Agreement”) with BankBoston, N.A. (the “Predecessor
Agent”) as rights agent. 

  

	B.	The Company wishes to remove the Predecessor Agent and substitute AST as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement. 

  

	C.	The Company has given the Predecessor Agent notice of removal of the Predecessor Agent as rights agent. 

 AGREEMENT 
 NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and of other
consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 
  

	1.	Section 21 of the Rights Agreement is hereby amended to provide that any successor rights agent shall, at the time of its appointment as rights agent, have a combined capital
and surplus of at least $10 million, rather than $100 million. 

  

	2.	The Company hereby appoints AST as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement, to serve in that capacity for the consideration and subject to all of the terms
and conditions of the Rights Agreement. 

  

	3.	AST hereby accepts the appointment as rights agent pursuant to Section 21 of the Rights Agreement and agrees to serve in that capacity for the consideration and subject to all
of the terms and conditions of the Rights Agreement. 

  

	4.	From and after the effective date hereof, each and every reference in the Rights Agreement to a “Rights Agent” shall be deemed to be a reference to AST.









 Section 26 of the Rights Agreement is amended to provide that notices or demands to the Rights Agent shall be
addressed as follows (until another address is filed): 
 American Stock Transfer & Trust Company 
 59 Maiden Lane 
 New York, NY 10038

 Attention:        Corporate Trust Department 
  

	5.	Except as expressly modified herein, the Rights Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 

  

	7.	This Agreement of Substitution and Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall together constitute one and the same document.


 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly executed as of the dated indicated above. 

 

			
	CIRCOR International, Inc.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Alan J. Glass

		 	Alan J. Glass, Corporate Counsel and Assistant Secretary
	
	AMERICAN STOCK TRANSFER &
	TRUST COMPANY
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Herbert J. Lemmer

		 	Herbert J. Lemmer, Vice President
[665 NE2d 656, 642 NYS2d 855]

#### Alice Ace, Appellant, v State of New York, Respondent.

Argued February 7, 1996;

decided March 21, 1996

*996APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Kaufman & Feit,*New York City *(Matthew A. Kaufman*of counsel), for appellant.

*Dennis C. Vacco, Attorney-General,*Albany *(Andrea Oser, Victoria A. Graffeo*and *Peter H. Schiff*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order affirmed, without costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum of the Appellate Division (207 AD2d 813).

Concur: Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick.
#### Frank E. Gregory and William E. Gregory, Respondents, v. James W. Dean and Clarence W. Dean, Appellants.

— Judgment affirmed, with costs.