alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.44


Exhibit 10.44




PROMISSORY NOTE







$100,000                                                                                                                                                  February 15, 2011







FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned (herein "Maker"), promises to pay to the order of Joseph W. Abrams (“Payee”), the principal sum of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000) one (1) year from the date hereof (the "Maturity Date"), unless Payee consents to an extension of the Maturity Date, in lawful money of the United States of America unless Payee agrees to another form of payment. The unpaid principal amount shall bear interest at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum, which shall be payable on the one-year anniversary of the date hereof (or until the earlier date of payment if this Note is prepaid).

17.

If the Maker shall make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, or shall admit in writing its inability to pay its debts as they become due, or shall file a petition in bankruptcy, or shall be adjudicated a bankrupt or insolvent, then, and upon the happening of any such event, the Payee at its option, may declare the entire unpaid balance of the principal hereunder immediately due and payable with interest thereon as herein provided. 

18.

Presentment, demand, protest or notice of any kind are hereby waived by the Maker.  Maker may not set off against any amounts due to Payee hereunder any claims against Payee or other amounts owed by Payee to Maker.

19.

In the case any one or more of the events of default specified in paragraph 1 above shall have happened and be continuing, the Payee may proceed to protect and enforce its rights either by suit in equity and/or by action at law, or by other appropriate proceedings.

20.

The Maker agrees to pay all reasonable costs of collection, including attorneys’ fees which may be incurred in the collection of this Note or any portion thereof and, in case an action is instituted for such purposes, the amount of all attorneys' fees shall be such amount as the court shall adjudge reasonable.

21.

This Note is made and delivered in, and shall be governed, construed and enforced under the laws of the State of California.

22.

No delay or omission of the Payee to exercise any right hereunder, whether before or after the happening of any event of default, shall impair any such right or shall operate as a waiver thereof or of any event of default hereunder nor shall any single or partial exercise thereof preclude any other or further exercise thereof, or the exercise of any other right.

23.

This Note shall be subject to prepayment, at the option of the Maker, in whole or in part, at any time and from time to time, without premium or penalty.

24.

This Note or any benefits or obligations hereunder may not be assigned or transferred by the Maker.







MAKER:




PROPELL CORPORATION







By: s/Edward Bernstein                 

Edward Bernstein, CEO










Acknowledged and agreed to by PAYEE:







By: /s/Joseph Abrams                 

Joseph W. Abrams




Date:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 15953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7694]





                Sunshine Act Meetings



Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 59 / Tuesday, March 28, 1995 / 
Sunshine Act Meetings
[[Page 15953]] 


FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION



FCC To Hold Open Commission Meeting, Thursday, March 30, 1995

    The Federal Communications Commission will hold an Open Meeting on 
the subject listed below on Thursday, March 30, 1995, which is 
scheduled to commence at 9:30 a.m., in Room 856, at 1919 M Street, 
N.W., Washington, D.C.

Item No., Bureau, and Subject

1--Common Carrier--Title: Price Cap Performance Review for Local 
    Exchange Carriers (CC Docket No. 94-1). Summary: The Commission 
    will review the results of the first four years of local 
    exchange carrier price cap regulation.

    Additional information concerning this meeting may be obtained from 
Audrey Spivack or Maureen Peratino, Office of Public Affairs, telephone 
number (202) 418-0500.

    Dated: March 23, 1995.

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,

Acting Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95-7694 Filed 3-24-95; 11:01 am]

BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 31 (Wednesday, February 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 8640-8641]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3697]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 020695A]


Marine Mammals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Receipt of application for a scientific research permit 
(P319D).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that Dr. Randall S. Wells, Dolphin 
Biology Research Institute, c/o Mote Marine Laboratory, 1600 Thompson 
Parkway, Sarasota, FL 34236, has applied in due form for a permit to 
take bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) for purposes of 
scientific research.

DATES: Written comments must be received on or before March 17, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The application and related documents are available for 
review [[Page 8641]] upon written request or by appointment in the 
following offices:
    Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-
West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289); and
    Director, Southeast Region, NMFS, NOAA, 9721 Executive Center Drive 
North, St. Petersburg, FL 33702 (813/570-5312).
    Written data or views, or requests for a public hearing on this 
request, should be submitted to the Chief, Permits Division, F/PR1, 
NMFS, 1335 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, within 30 days 
of the publication of this notice. Those individuals requesting a 
hearing should set forth the specific reasons why a hearing on this 
particular request would be appropriate.
    Concurrent with the publication of this notice in the Federal 
Register, the Secretary of Commerce is forwarding copies of this 
application to the Marine Mammal Commission and its Committee of 
Scientific Advisors.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The subject permit is requested under the 
authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.), and the Regulations Governing the Taking and 
Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    The applicant seeks authorization to capture and subsequently 
release up to 150 individual dolphins near the Sarasota, Florida, area 
over a 5-year period. Some animals may be recaptured up to 3 times per 
year. The animals would be weighed, measured, blood sampled, and have 
other samples taken and/or have procedures conducted for the assessment 
of various health parameters. Acoustic recordings and playback 
experiments would also be conducted prior to the animals' release. 
Additionally, the applicant requests authorization to mark the animals 
with freezebrands, cattle ear tags, or roto-tags, and also to radio tag 
up to 20 of these dolphins per year.

    Dated: February 9, 1995.
P.A. Montanio,
Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-3697 Filed 2-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
15-1518
United States v. Jones



### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE
SECOND CIRCUIT

At a Stated Term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the
3 rd day of October, two thousand sixteen.

Before: John M. Walker, Jr., Guido Calabresi, Peter W. Hall, Circuit Judges

.

_______________________________
United States of America,

Appellee,

v.

Corey Jones,

Defendant - Appellant. ORDER

Docket No. 15-1518

________________________________

It is hereby ORDERED that, pending the Supreme Court’s disposition in Beckles v.
United States , No. 15-8544, this Court’s opinion, issued on July 21, 2016, is VACATED and Appellee’s petition for rehearing and for rehearing en banc is held in abeyance. Following the disposition in Beckles , Appellee will be permitted to re-file the petition for rehearing, which may include arguments based on the decision in Beckles , and Appellant will be permitted to file a

response.

For the Court :

Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe,
Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000895648
<NAME> GENERAL GROWTH PROPERTIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          15,747
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   25,384
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                39,209
<PP&E>                                       1,865,921
<DEPRECIATION>                               (188,744)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,757,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           65,580
<BONDS>                                      1,169,483
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,079
<OTHER-SE>                                     519,565
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,757,717
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               217,405
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                (111,955)
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (2,421)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (67,826)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 33,816
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             17,589
<DISCONTINUED>                                  43,821
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (36,871)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    59,742
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.12


</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICERPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe Annual Report on Form 10-K of Unify Corporation (the “Company”) forthe fiscal year ended April 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Todd E. Wille,President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 906”), that, to the best of myknowledge:

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and

(2)          Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periodcovered by the Report.
| July 26, 2005 |                                    |
|---------------|-----------------------------------------|
|          | /s/ TODD E. WILLE                       |
|          | Todd E. Wille                           |
|          | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

*A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. This certification accompaniesthis Report pursuant to Section 906 and shall not, except to the extentrequired by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by theCompany for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended.*

----
#### The CADLE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. ESTATE of Forrest WEAVER, Respondent.

No. D-3866.

Supreme Court of Texas.

March 9, 1994.

P. Anne Brewster, Michael L. Jones, Randall K. Lindley, Dallas, for petitioner.

Robert W. Fischer, Dallas, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This case presents the question resolved today in *Jackson v. Thweatt,*883 S.W.2d 171 (Tex.1994). Because the decision of the court of appeals, 883 S.W.2d 219, conflicts with our holding in *Jackson,*we reverse the judgment of the court below and remand the cause to that court for further proceedings.

Forrest Weaver executed two promissory notes to the First National Bank of Irving in February 1984 and February 1986, respectively. The FDIC, as receiver for the bank, acquired these notes in April 1986. The notes went into default in November 1986, and were subsequently assigned by the FDIC to The Cadle Company (“Cadle”) in February 1990. After Cadle brought suit against Weaver on the notes in January 1991, the defendant1 moved for summary judgment based on the Texas four year statute of limitations. *See*Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code § 16.004. The trial court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, and the court of appeals affirmed, rejecting Ca-dle’s argument that it was entitled to the six year limitations period applicable to the FDIC. *See*12 U.S.C. § 1821(d)(14).

We held today in *Jackson*that an assignee of a promissory note from the FDIC does receive the benefit of the extended limitations provision applicable to the FDIC. Accordingly, without hearing oral argument, a majority of the Court reverses the judgment of the court of appeals and remands the cause to that court for consideration of respondent’s remaining arguments not previously reached.2

1

. Weaver died a short time after suit was filed and the executor of his estate was substituted as defendant.

2

. Respondent argues that, even if an assignee generally receives the benefit of the FDIC's special limitations period, Cadle expressly waived that right in this case pursuant to a contractual provision in the assignment. Respondent also contends that the trial court erred by not granting its plea in abatement challenging Cadle's corporate standing to bring suit in Texas.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF J. O., A CHILD,

 

 Appellant. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-20-00225-CV

Appeal from the

388th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2015DCM2215)

O R D E R

Appellant has filed a motion for a stay of proceedings. Because the record on this motion 

is insufficient to demonstrate the need for a stay, the motion is denied without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 4

th day of December, 2020.

PER CURIAM

Before Alley, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
Exhibit 32.2
 
 
 Certification
of Acting co-CFOs 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 on Form 10-Q of GAMCO Investors, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Jeffrey M.
Farber, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of 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.
 
 
 /s/ Jeffrey M. Farber
 Name:
Jeffrey M. Farber
 Title:   Chief
Financial Officer
 Date:   August
6, 2009
 
 This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2014

s0421 

# Order

Clerk April 28, 2014

148429

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148429

COA: 311131

Wayne CC: 11

- 010960

- FC

DESHAWN MARTELL GOODMAN,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 14, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
**Exhibit 32.1****CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO****18 U.S.C. SECTION1350,****AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO****SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the QuarterlyReport of Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Luther E. Proper, Chief ExecutiveOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted 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. |

|                         |                           |        |
|-------------------------|---------------------------|--------|
| By:                     | /s/ LUTHER E. PROPER |   |
|                    |                           |   |
| Luther E. Proper        |                      |
| Chief Executive Officer |                      |
| August 12, 2003         |                      |

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. and will be retainedby Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7626]



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



DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Flight Service Station at Tanana, AK; Notice of Change in 
Facility Operation

    Notice is hereby given that on or about March 31, 1995, the Flight 
Service Station at Tanana, Alaska, will be closed. Services to the 
general aviation public formerly provided by this facility will be 
provided by the Automated Flight Service Station at Fairbanks, Alaska.
    This information will be reflected in the FAA Organization 
Statement the next time it is reissued. Sec. 313(a) of the Federal 
Aviation Act of 1958, as amended, 72 Stat. 752; 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a).


    Issued in Anchorage, Alaska on March 6, 1995.
Jacqueline L. Smith,
Regional Administrator, Alaskan Region.
[FR Doc. 95-7626 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3165

Saginomiya America, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4042

Enerpac:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel