alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.2

 

Name of Company:

JD.COM, INC.

 

	
 
    	
JD.COM, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Number:
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Number
    	
Class A Ordinary Share(s)
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
-   [no. of shares] -
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands
    
	
Class A   Ordinary Share(s):
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
-   [no. of shares] -
    	
Share capital is US$2,000,000   divided into
    
	
 
    	
(i) 99,000,000,000 Class A   Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.00002 each and
    
	
 
    	
(ii) 1,000,000,000 Class B   Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.00002 each
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Issued to:
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
[name of shareholder]
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
THIS IS TO   CERTIFY THAT [name of shareholder] is   the registered holder of [no.   of shares] Class A Ordinary Share(s) in the   above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association   thereof.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Dated
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
EXECUTED on   behalf of the said Company on the                    day   of                         2014   by:
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Transferred   from:
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
DIRECTOR
    	
 
    	
 
    
					


 










 

	
 
    	
TRANSFER
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
I                                                                                                                                                                                                   (the   Transferor) for the value received
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
DO HEREBY   transfer to
    	
(the Transferee) the
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
shares standing in my name in the
    
	
 
    	
undertaking   called  JD.COM, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
To hold the   same unto the Transferee
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Dated
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Signed by   the Transferor
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
in the   presence of:
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Witness
    	
 
    	
Transferor
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 148 (Thursday, July 31, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 44757]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-17521]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Human Genome Research Institute; Notice of Closed 
Meetings

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meetings.
    The meetings will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Inherited Disease Research Access 
Committee.
    Date: September 5, 2008.
    Time: 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Camilla E. Day, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
CIDR, National Human Genome Research Institute, National Institutes 
of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 4075, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 
402-0838, [email protected].

    Name of Committee: National Human Genome Research Institute 
Special Emphasis Panel; CEGS Review.
    Date: November 6-7, 2008.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: The Legacy Hotel, (Formerly the Ramada Inn Rockville), 
1775 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852.
    Contact Person: Ken D. Nakamura, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Branch, National Human Genome Research Institute, 
National Institutes of Health, 5635 Fishers Lane, Suite 4076, MSC 
9306, Rockville, MD 20852, 301-402-0838, [email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.172, Human 
Genome Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: July 23, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-17521 Filed 7-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Petitioner,

MISC. NO. 09-mc-50530

-vsHON. ROBERT H. CLELAND

DEBRA CAMPBELL, OFFICER,

P.J. HOSPITALITY, INC.,

d/b/a BEANS AND CORNBREAD,

Respondent.

_____________________________________/

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION TO 

ENFORCE IRS SUMMONS

Petitioner having advised the Court that it wishes to dismiss without prejudice the

Petition to Enforce IRS Summons filed against Debra Campbell, Officer, P.J. Hospitality,

Inc., d/b/a Beans and Cornbread;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Petition to Enforce IRS Summons brought

against respondent, Debra Campbell, Officer, P.J. Hospitality, Inc., d/b/a Beans and

Cornbread, by the petitioner is hereby dismissed without prejudice and without costs.

 S/Robert H. Cleland 

ROBERT H. CLELAND

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Dated: October 29, 2010

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was mailed to counsel of record on
this date, October 29, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

 S/Lisa Wagner 

Case Manager and Deputy Clerk

(313) 234-5522
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

CLIFTON E JACKSON and 

CHRISTOPHER M SCHARNITZKE,

Plaintiff, Case No. 09-11529

Honorable David M. Lawson

v. 

SEGWICK CLAIMS MANAGEMENT 

SERVICES, INC., COCA COLA 

ENTERPRISES, INC., and PAUL 

DROUILLARD,

Defendants.

________________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SURREPLY

Defendant Coca Cola Enterprises moved for dismissal of the plaintiffs’ complaint on July

15, 2009. The plaintiffs responded on July 30, 2009, and Coca Cola replied on August 6, 2009. On

August 11, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a motion for leave to file a surreply to Coca Cola’s reply brief.

In the brief, the plaintiffs argue that Coca Cola’s motion to dismiss should be denied. 

The Local Rules provide a framework for briefing motions and responses to motions. E.D.

Mich. LR 7.1(d). A brief in support of a motion is required. The non-moving party then has twentyone days to file a response. If the moving party desires, it then may file a reply brief. A party may

file an additional brief only upon presenting the Court with good cause. The plaintiffs motion does

not contain any reason whatsoever why an additional brief is needed in this case. Instead, the issue

presented by the motion – whether a surreply should be allowed by the Court – is not addressed in

the plaintiffs’ brief. The plaintiffs have not offered any reason why the procedure of the local rules

should be disregarded in this case.

2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 42 Filed 08/13/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 698
-2-

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file surreply [dkt. #40]

is DENIED.

s/David M. Lawson 

DAVID M. LAWSON

United States District Judge

Dated: August 13, 2009

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on August 13, 2009.

s/Lisa M. Ware 

LISA M. WARE

2:09-cv-11529-NGE-VMM Doc # 42 Filed 08/13/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 699
Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 1 of 6

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 2 of 6

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 3 of 6

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 4 of 6

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 5 of 6

Case 2:18-cv-00605-DWL   Document 26-5   Filed 06/05/18   Page 6 of 6
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3997

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the 1990 tax increase

on beer.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 2, 1996

Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts (for himself and Mr. MATSUI) introduced the

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal

the 1990 tax increase on beer.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF 1990 TAX INCREASE ON BEER.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 5051(a)

5 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to imposi6 tion and rate of tax on beer) is amended by striking ‘‘$18’’

7 and inserting ‘‘$9’’.
2

•HR 3997 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) shall take effect on the 7th day after the

3 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
Exhibit C

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1119-3 Filed 02/02/21 Page 1 of 3
1

REDACTED

From: Denis M. Fitzgibbons <sba.communications@staff.azbar.org>

Sent: Friday, January 22, 2021 12:19 PM

To:

Subject: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Legal Services May Qualify for Phase 1B of Arizona’s Vaccine 

Prioritization

Important Communication from the State Bar of Arizona Board of Governors

Dear Fellow Member: 

The email sent yesterday inadvertently linked to the incorrect Executive 

Order. Executive Order 2020-12 can be found here. 

We received an overwhelming response, and to further clarify per Arizona 

Department of Health Services, local allocators may further sub-prioritize 

qualified recipients in each phase based on vaccine supply. For example, 

Maricopa County Public Health currently has prioritized the following 1B 

categories for vaccination eligibility at this time: adults 75 and older, 

education and childcare workers, and law enforcement/protective services. 

Please refer to the AZDH's website and county public health websites to 

find up to date information on vaccine distribution guidance, including 

distribution groups and timelines. 

You can find additional recommendations from the Vaccine and Antiviral 

Prioritization Advisory Committee (VAPAC) here. 

Finally, those who are regularly at the courts (such as prosecutors, defense 

attorneys and dependency attorneys), fall into the critical governmental 

services category and should work with their employers on opportunities for 

getting vaccinated. 

Be well, 

Denis M. Fitzgibbons 

President 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1119-3 Filed 02/02/21 Page 2 of 3
2

State Bar of Arizona 

Manage Your Subscription 

This message was sent to from: 

State Bar of Arizona 

sba.communications@staff.azbar.org 

4201 N. 24th St. Suite 100 

Phoenix, Arizona 85016-6266 United States 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1119-3 Filed 02/02/21 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

ORDER ESTABLISHING TRIAL DOCKET FOR THE MONTHS OF NOVEMBER AND

 DECEMBER, 2009, BEFORE THE HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN*

Listed below are the cases on this Court's trial docket for the months of November and

December, 2009. Counsel will be notified when their case reaches No. 5. After such

notice, counsel should be prepared to begin trial any time on 48 hours notice. It is

counsel's responsibility in all cases after they have been so notified to contact my clerk,

Marilyn Orem, at 234-5147, to ascertain the status of the trial docket. Unless otherwise

notified, this Court commences trial at 8:45 a.m. PLEASE BE PROMPT!

1. 09-10525 TRUSTEES OF THE BRICKLAYERS PENSION TRUST FUND, ET.AL V. 

 DESANTIS CONSTRUCTION CO.

2. 09-10832 ARNOLD V. CITIZENS FIRST BANCORP

3. 09-10347 HASSAN V. AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING

4. 09-11282 DANIEL V. ALLSTATE INSURANCE CO.

5. 07-10805 HUMPHRIES V. OAKLAND COUNTY ROAD COMMISSION

6. 08-14467 FLANAGAN V. STEWART, ET.AL

7. 08-14291 MILLS V. RODABAUGH, ET.AL

 09-10921 

8. 08-14886 PENNSYLVANIA LIFE INSURANCE CO. V. CITY OF RIVER ROUGE

9. 09-11691 CLEVELAND V. QUEST DIAGNOSTICS

s/Patrick J. Duggan 

Patrick J. Duggan

United States District Judge

Dated: October 1, 2009

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record

on October 1, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Marilyn Orem 

Case Manager

*PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT TRIAL WILL NOT BEGIN BEFORE THE FINAL

PRETRIAL CONFERENCE DATE.

IF THERE IS A MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PENDING, FINAL PRETRIAL

CONFERENCE WILL BE RESCHEDULED APPROXIMATELY 10 DAYS AFTER ANY

DECISION ON SUCH MOTION.

2:09-cv-11691-PJD-VMM Doc # 22 Filed 10/01/09 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 60
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Gerald HASSEL, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 67942.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 26, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 15,1996.

Application to Transfer Denied June 25,1996.

Marsha Brady, Hillsboro, for appellant.

Robert G. Wilkins, Prosecuting Attorney, Cynthia A. Carle, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, Jefferson County, Hillsboro, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and GRIMM, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals after he was convicted by a jury of two counts of third degree sexual abuse, § 566.120, RSMo Supp.1992. The court sentenced him in accordance with the jury’s assessment to consecutive county jail terms of six months on each count and imposed a $500 fine for each count. We affirm. We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
Exhibit 32.1

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

           I, Thomas F. Helms, Jr., as Chief Executive Officer of North Atlantic
Trading Company, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending
December 31, 2003 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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: March 29, 2004


                                         /s/ Thomas F. Helms, Jr.
                                         -------------------------------------
                                         Thomas F. Helms, Jr.
                                         Chief Executive Officer
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 ROADSHIPS HOLDINGS, INC. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report'), I, Michael Nugent, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge
and belief:
 
 (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/ Michael
Nugent
 Michael
Nugent, Chief Executive Officer
 Date: May
14, 2010
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3855 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3855

  To authorize the reburial in the Memorial Amphitheater at Arlington 
   National Cemetery of an unknown American who lost his life while 
 serving in the Union Army of the United States during the Civil War, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 18, 1996

  Mr. Kasich introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To authorize the reburial in the Memorial Amphitheater at Arlington 
   National Cemetery of an unknown American who lost his life while 
 serving in the Union Army of the United States during the Civil War, 
                        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. REBURIAL OF UNKNOWN SOLDIER FROM CIVIL WAR IN THE MEMORIAL 
              AMPHITHEATER OF ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY.

    The Secretary of Defense is authorized and directed to cause to be 
brought from a National Cemetery the remains of an American who was a 
member of the Union Army of the United States, who served in the Civil 
War of 1861 through 1865 who lost his life during the Civil War, and 
whose identity has not been established, for burial in the Memorial 
Amphitheater of the National Cemetery at Arlington, Virginia.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be 
necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Filed 3/24/15 P. v. Lucachin CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SEVEN

THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.
ANDY LUCACHIN,
Defendant and Appellant. B258450
(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA098987)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Su perior Court of Los Angeles County, Norman J. Shapiro, Judge. Affirmed.

Steven A. Brody, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________ __________2 When Ashley English arrived home, she discovered her apartment had been ransacked and $3,500 worth of property was mi ssing. After the police and English found her missing property in Andy Lucachin’s home, he was arrested and charged with first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) 1 and receiving stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)) with specia l allegations he had served th ree prior prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). A jury convicted Lucachin as charged. In a bifurcated proceeding, he admitted the prior prison term enhancements. The trial c ourt sentenced Lucachin to an aggregate state prison term of nine years: the six-year upper term for first degree burglary plus one year for each of the three prior pr ison term enhancements. Th e court stayed sentencing for receiving stolen property under section 654. We appointed counsel to represent Lucach in on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On December 22, 2014 we advised Lucachin he had 30 days within which to pe rsonally submit any
contentions or issues he wished us to c onsider. We have received no response.
We have examined the record and are sa tisfied Lucachin’s a ppellate attorney has fully complied with the res ponsibilities of counsel and no arguable issue exists. ( Smith v.
Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [1 20 S.Ct. 746, 14 5 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112-113; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

IWASAKI, J. * We concur:

PERLUSS, P. J. ZELON, J.

1 Statutory references are to this code.

* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of th e California Constitution.
|  | (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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 result of operations of the      Company. |
|--|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                     |   |                                          |
|------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------|
|                                     |   |                                          |   |
| Dated:  December      15, 2008 | By:    | /s/ Adam      S. Jackson                 |   |
|                                     |   | Adam      S. Jackson, Chief Financial Officer |   |
|                                     |   |                                          |   |

----