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



Exhibit 10.57
 EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
 Effective as of March 14, 2007 between
AFC Enterprises, Inc. (the Company) and
Robert Calderin (Employee)
    Term of Agreement.
   Employment.
 Position.
 Time and Efforts.




---



##### 



Base Salary.
  Incentive Pay.
 Annual Plan.
 Target Incentive Pay.
 Payment of Incentive Pay.
 Termination of Employment.
 Restricted Stock Grant and Stock Options.
   
 2




---



##### 



Employee Benefits.
 Executive Flex Perk.
 Life Insurance.
 Disability Insurance.
   Executive Medical Benefit.
 Other Benefits.
  
 3




---



##### 



Vacation.
 Paramount Provisions
   Business Expenses.
  Termination of Employment.
 Definitions.
 Cause.
  
 4




---



##### 



Disability.
 Termination upon Death or Disability.
 Termination by the Company for other than Death or Disability or for Cause.
  Voluntary Termination by Employee or Termination for Cause.
  
 5




---



##### 



Change of Control, Change in Responsibilities.
 both
     Confidentiality and Non-Competition.
 Definitions
  
 6




---



##### 



Covenant Not-To-Disclose
     
 7




---



##### 



Covenant of Non-Disparagement and Cooperation
 Covenant Not-To-Induce
 Remedies
  
 8




---



##### 



Severability
 Ownership of Property
 No Defense
 Gross Up Payment
  
 9




---



##### 



Indemnification.
 Company Obligations
 Notice and Defense of Claim
  
 10




---



##### 



Survival
 Dispute Resolution.
 Agreement to Arbitrate
 Procedure
 Rights of Parties
  
 11




---



##### 



Employee Acknowledgment.
  Amendments.
  Successors.
  Assignment.
  Waiver.
  
 12




---



##### 



Severability.
  Survival.
  Entire Terms.
  Notices.
   
  
  
 13




---



##### 



Headings.
  Governing Laws.
    
 14




---



##### 



COMPANY:AFC ENTERPRISES, INC.By:
    
    /s/ Frank J. BelattiFrank J. BelattiChairman of the BoardEMPLOYEE:/s/ Robert CalderinRobert Calderin
  
 15
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 103 (Tuesday, May 28, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 26511]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13221]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. MG96-8-001]


Michigan Gas Storage Company; Notice of Filing

May 21, 1996.
    Take notice that on May 13, 1996, Michigan Gas Storage Company 
(Michigan Gas) filed a revised Standard K, 18 CFR 161.3(k), in response 
to the Commission's April 12, 1996 order.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 75 FERC para. 61,075 (1996).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 or 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice 
and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214). All such motions to 
intervene or protest should be filed on or before June 5, 1996. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 96-13221 Filed 5-24-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
---

|CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER             
|---------------------------------------------------------
|PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Mark McLeary, Chief Executive Officer of Del
Toro Silver Corp. (the Company) hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

| | (1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the
      period ended July 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    
| | (2) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.                                                                                                   

|Dated: September 21, 2009 | By:
      /s/ Mark McLeary   
|------------------------- | -----------------------------
|                          | Mark McLeary                 
|                          | Chief Executive Officer      
|                          | (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Del Toro Silver
Corp. and will be retained by Del Toro Silver Corp. and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**DISASTER
      PREPAREDNESS SYSTEMS, INC.**





**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 Disaster
      Preparedness Systems, Inc., (the
“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending February 28,2007 as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark
      J.
      Henrickson ,
      President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
      of
      2002, that to my 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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/Mark
                J. Henrickson
              Mark
                J. Henrickson
              May
                24, 2007
<PAGE>

                                   EXHIBIT 32

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Edward J. Geletka, President and Chief Executive Officer and L. Joseph Stella,
III, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Colonial
Bankshares, Inc. (the "Company") each certify in his capacity as an officer of
the Company that he has reviewed the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of the
Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 and that:

(1)  the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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 consolidated financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.


Date: November 10, 2006                 /s/ Edward J. Geletka
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Edward J. Geletka,
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer


Date: November 10, 2006                 /s/ L. Joseph Stella, III
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        L. Joseph Stella, III,
                                        Executive Vice President and Chief
                                        Financial Officer

The purpose of this statement is solely to comply with Title 18, Chapter 63,
Section 1350 of the United States Code, as amended by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Colonial Bankshares, Inc. and will be retained by Colonial
Bankshares, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

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

The undersigned, Henian Wu, the Chairman of China TMK Battery Systems Inc. (the Company), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:

1. The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2010 (the Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2. Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 20th day of
October, 2010.

/s/ Henian WuHenian Wu 
Chairman (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to China TMK Battery Systems Inc. and will be retained by China TMK Battery Systems Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.

The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

---
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 111 (Friday, June 7, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 29083]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-14340]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Navy


Notice of Planning and Steering Advisory Committee; Closed 
Meeting

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act (5 U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given that the Planning and 
Steering Advisory Committee will meet on June 26, 1996 from 9:00 a.m. 
to 4:00 p.m., at the Center for Naval Analyses, 4401 Ford Avenue, 
Alexandria, Virginia. This session will be closed to the public.
    The purpose of this meeting is to discuss topics relevant to SSBN 
security. The entire agenda will consist of classified information that 
is specifically authorized by Executive order to be kept secret in the 
interest of national defense and is properly classified pursuant to 
such Executive order.
    Accordingly, the Under Secretary of the Navy has determined in 
writing that all sessions of the meeting shall be closed to the public 
because they concern matters listed in 552b(c)(1) of title 5, United 
States Code.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LCDR R.F. Brese, 2000 Navy Pentagon, 
Room 4D534, Washington, DC 20350-2000, Telephone Number: (703) 693-
7248.

    Dated: May 30, 1996.
M.A. Waters,
LCDR, JAGC, USN, Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 96-14340 Filed 6-6-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
Exhibit31.1


Certification
      of Chief Executive OfficerPursuant to Section 302 of
      the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




I, Douglas B. Dyer,
      certify that:




1.            
I have reviewed this
      Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal  year ended
      December 31, 2006, of Oasys Mobile, Inc. (“Oasys”);




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 Oasys as of, and for, the
      periods presented in this report.




4.            
Oasys’s other certifying
      officers and I are responsible for establishing and
      maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Exchange
      Act
      Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))  for Oasys 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 Oasys, 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 Oasys’ disclosure control’s 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; and




(c)               
      Disclosed in this report any change in Oasys’ internal control over financial
      reporting that occurred during Oasys’ most recent fiscal quarter that has
      materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, Oasys’
internal control over financial reporting; and




5.            
Oasys’ other certifying officers
      and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
      evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to Oasys’ auditors and
      the audit committee of Oasys’ board of directors:




(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 Oasys’ ability to record, process, summarize and report
      financial information; and




(b)               
      Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who have a significant role in Oasys’ internal control over financial
      reporting.






Date:   
April 2, 2007




/s/ Douglas B.
      DyerDouglas B. DyerChief Executive Officer
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

 Submitted February 2, 2009∗

Decided February 25, 2009

Before

FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge

WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge

No. 08-3053

JULIO JOSE LEON SANCHEZ, 

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent-Appellee.

Appeal from the United 

States District Court for the 

Western District of Wisconsin.

No. 08-cv-243-bbc

Barbara B. Crabb,

Chief Judge.

Order

After denying Julio Jose Leon Sanchez’s motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. §2255, 

the district judge stated that reasonable persons could disagree with her decision and 

issued a certificate of appealability. This certificate does not comply with 28 U.S.C. 

§2253(c)(3) because it does not identify the issue for appeal or state why that issue 

 

∗ This successive appeal has been submitted to the original panel under Operating Procedure 6(b). After 

examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. See Fed. R. 

App. P. 34(a); Cir. R. 34(f).

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1
No. 08-3053 Page 2

satisfies the requirement of subsection (b)(2) that the appeal present a “substantial 

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” The district court’s certificate therefore 

is vacated. Davis v. Borgen, 349 F.3d 1027 (7th Cir. 2003).

We have reviewed the district court’s opinion and appellant’s brief. For the 

reasons explained in the district court’s thorough opinion, none of the arguments 

presented by appellant is substantial. Sanchez therefore is not entitled to a certificate of 

appealability in this court, and the appeal is dismissed.
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

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney

ANNA WRIGHT

Assistant U.S. Attorney

NATHANIEL J. WALTERS

Assistant United States Attorney State Bar No.: 029708

405 West Congress, Suite 4800

Tucson, Arizona 85701-5040

Telephone: (520) 620-7300

E-mail: anna.wright@usdoj.gov

E-mail: nathaniel.walters@usdoj.gov Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Scott Daniel Warren, Defendant.

MJ-17-00341-RCC (JR)

GOVERNMENT’S MOTION TO 

CONTINUE SENTENCING

The United States of America, by and through its undersigned attorneys, requests

the Court continue the sentencing date 60 days from its current date of February 27, 2020. 

As the Court is likely aware, on February 3, 2020, Judge Marquez issued an order reversing 

the defendants’ convictions in United States v. Hoffman et al., CR-19-00693-DTF, a case 

involving substantially similar conduct and legal issues. The United States is currently 

considering whether to appeal the Court’s decision in Hoffman, a determination that must 

be made by the United States Solicitor General. See 28 C.F.R. § 0.20. Given the overlap 

between Hoffman and this case, a decision on how the United States will proceed in

Hoffman will likely affect its litigating position at sentencing in this case. Thus, in the 

interests of the parties’ resources and judicial economy, the government respectfully asks 

for a continuance of the sentencing.

The defendant is out of custody and will thus not be prejudiced by a continuance.

///

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 151 Filed 02/14/20 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

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

Counsel for the defendant provided the following response regarding their position: 

“Please indicate that the defense does object to a continuance and would like a hearing on 

the matter.”

Respectfully submitted this 14th day of February, 2020.

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney

District of Arizona

/s/ Anna R. Wright & Nathaniel J. Walters

ANNA WRIGHT &

NATHANIEL J. WALTERS

Assistant United States Attorneys

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or by

other means this 14th day of February, 2020, to:

All ECF participants

Case 4:17-mj-00341-RCC-JR Document 151 Filed 02/14/20 Page 2 of 2
#### ACADEMY CORP., Appellant, v. SUNWEST N.O.P., INC., Appellee.

No. C14-92-00285-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (14th Dist.).

May 6, 1993.

Rehearing Denied June 3, 1993.

Edmund L. Cogburn, Harry N. Walsh, III, Houston, for appellant.

Joe B. Henderson, Jr., Thomas A. Leeper, Huntsville, for appellee.

Before ROBERTSON, CANNON and BOWERS, JJ.

OPINION

ROBERTSON, Justice.

Academy Corp., appellant, brings this appeal from a county court judgment in a forcible detainer action brought by Sun-West N.O.P., Inc., appellee. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

A final judgment of the county court in a forcible detainer action may not be appealed on the issue of *possession,*unless the premises are used for residential purposes. Tex.PROP.Code Ann. § 24.007 (Vernon Supp.1993); *see Mullins v. Coussons,*745 S.W.2d 50, 51 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1987, orig. proceeding); *Chang v. Resolution Trust Corp.,*814 S.W.2d 543, 545 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1991, no writ). Appellant concedes that the property involved was used for commercial purposes. Therefore, we do not have jurisdiction to review the county court’s determination of possession.

In its first point of error, appellant argues that it is contesting appellee’s proof of the landlord-tenant relationship. We agree with appellant that appellee had the burden to prove that a landlord-tenant rela*834tionship existed between the parties. Tex. Prop.Code Ann. § 24.002 (Vernon Supp. 1993). However, we do not agree with their contention that this proof is jurisdictional, and therefore reviewable by this court. This relationship is just one of the elements required by § 24.002 to support a forcible detainer action. The proof of a landlord-tenant relationship is required to show who has the greater right of possession, and the question of possession is exactly what § 24.007 says is not reviewable.

Appellant also challenged the award of attorney’s fees to appellee. However, appellant based its challenge of the award on the lack of jurisdiction. If appellant had challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to support the award, § 24.007 would not preclude this court from a review of such a point of error. Since appellant based his point of error on the merits of possession, we do not have jurisdiction to review the award.

Appellee’s motion to dismiss is granted and we order this appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction.