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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-1975

FRANK DAVID HILL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

LIGHTMOTIVE FAT MAN, INCORPORATED; TRANSAMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, District

Judge. (CA-97-165-F)

Submitted: August 27, 1998 Decided: September 11, 1998

Before NIEMEYER and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam

opinion.

Frank David Hill, Appellant Pro Se. Richard Whitlowe Ellis, Neil

Alvin Riemann, SMITH, HELMS, MULLIS & MOORE, Raleigh, North Carolina; Kimberly Quade Cacheris, Jill Quattlebaum Byrum, Kevin D.

Elliott, MORRIS, YORK, WILLIAMS, SRULES & BREARLEY, Charlotte,

North Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal of the final

order in his civil action. We dismiss the appeal of this order for

lack of jurisdiction. The time periods for filing notices of appeal

are governed by Fed. R. App. P. 4. These periods are “mandatory and

jurisdictional.” Browder v. Director, Dep’t of Corrections, 434

U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson, 361 U.S.

220, 229 (1960)). Parties to civil actions have thirty days within

which to file in the district court notices of appeal from judgments or final orders. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1). The only exceptions

to the appeal period are when the district court extends the time

to appeal under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or reopens the appeal

period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6).

The district court entered its final order on April 7, 1998;

Appellant’s notice of appeal was filed on June 22, 1998, which is

beyond the thirty-day appeal period. Appellant’s failure to note a

timely appeal or obtain an extension of the appeal period leaves

this court without jurisdiction to consider the merits of Appellant’s appeal. We therefore dismiss the appeal of the final order.

The appeal of the denial of Appellant’s motion to reconsider

is timely. The district court correctly denied the motion, construed as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 motion, because Appellant only

reargued the merits of his appeal and did not raise any ground
3

meriting Rule 60 relief. We therefore affirm the denial of Appellant’s motion for reconsideration.

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART
Exhibit 32.4

Statement of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of
Southern California Gas Company (the "Company") certifies that:

(i)	the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly
period ended March 31, 2004 (the "Quarterly 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

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



April 29, 2004
                                               /S/ DEBRA L. REED
                                             ______________________
                                               Debra L. Reed
                                               Chief Financial Officer
#### Rad Oil Co., Inc., Respondent, v Pride & Glory, Ltd., et al., Defendants, and Fill-Up Petroleum, Inc., Appellant.

[677 NYS2d 494]

In an action, *inter alia,*to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant Fill-Up Petroleum, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), entered September 5, 1997, as denied those branches of the motion of the defendants Pride & Glory, Ltd., Fill-Up Petroleum, Inc., Philip J. Dowell, Edwin Dowell, Gail Dowell formerly known as Gail Foley, and H. Linda Dowell which were for summary judgment dismissing the 10th through 15th causes of action insofar as asserted against it, and to vacate the notice of pendency.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly found that the plaintiff raised questions of fact which bar the granting of summary judgment to the appellant *(see, Zuckerman v New York City,*49 NY2d 557). Copertino, J. P., Santucci, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 28, 1997, and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000074856
<NAME>                        Oregon Metallurgical Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
<CURRENCY>                                     USD
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-28-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         2,420
<SECURITIES>                                   34,326
<RECEIVABLES>                                  62,951
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (768)
<INVENTORY>                                    116,725
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               218,216
<PP&E>                                         125,694
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (73,686)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 288,003
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          38,080
<BONDS>                                        4,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       16,445
<OTHER-SE>                                     218,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   288,003
<SALES>                                        75,051
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               75,051
<CGS>                                          54,046
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  54,046
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               6,620
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             482
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                14,712
<INCOME-TAX>                                   5,309
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            9,403
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   9,403
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.57
        


</TABLE>
#### Richard S. Adams, Plaintiff in Error, *v.*Frederick Miller, Defendant in Error.

ERROR TO JOHNSON.

If a party brings a penal action without filing a bond for costs, it may be dismissed at the instance of the defendant, but he must raise the objection at the earliest opportunity, or he waives his right to insist upon it.

This was an action commenced before a justice of the peace, for the recovery of a penalty; the justice rendered a judgment for the plaintiff; the defendant then took the case to the circuit court by appeal. At the May term, 1849, of the Johnson Circuit Court, Denning, Judge, presiding, the suit was dismissed on the application of the defendant, because the plaintiff had omitted to give security for costs before commencing the action. Adams brought the suit to this court by writ of error.

J. Jack, for plaintiff in error.

J. Dougherty, for defendant in error.

Treat, C. J.

This was a penal action commenced before a justice of the peace, and removed by appeal into the circuit court. It was dismissed by the latter court, because security for costs had not been given. The decision was clearly erroneous. The objection carne too late. It was of a dilatory character, and should have been interposed before the justice. If a party brings a penal action without filing a bond for costs, it maybe dismissed at the instance of the defendant; but he must raise the objection at the earliest opportunity, or he waives his right to insist upon it. The case of Adams *v.*Miller, 12 Illinois, 27, is directly in point.

The judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

*Judgment reversed.*
218 So.2d 697

#### James Gordon BATTLES v. STATE.

7 Div. 843.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Feb. 6, 1969.

Rowan S. Bone and Jas. D. Pruett, Gadsden, for petitioner.

MacDonald Gallion, Atty. Gen., and Richard F. Calhoun, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

BLOODWORTH, Justice. '

Petition by James Gordon Battles for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision in Battles v. State, 44 Ala.App. 635, 218 So.2d 695.

Writ denied.

LIVINGSTON, C. J., and SIMPSON and COLEMAN, JJ., concur.
Republic_Dooley_Employment_Agreement_Amendment






AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of February 28, 2014, by and between REPUBLIC AIRWAYS HOLDINGS INC., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and TIMOTHY P. DOOLEY (the “Executive”).
R E C I T A L S
WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive have entered into that certain Employment Agreement dated as of April 12, 2011 (as amended on September 24, 2013, November 6, 2013, and January 24, 2014, the “Employment Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement as set forth in this Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1.    Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement is amended and restated to read in full:  “(a)    The term of employment pursuant to this Agreement (the “Term”) shall continue until June 30, 2014; provided that the Company may terminate this Agreement for any reason or no reason by providing the Executive with 30 days prior written notice of such termination.”
2.    Except as modified hereby, the Employment Agreement remains in full force and effect.  This Amendment shall be effective upon signature by both the Company and the Executive.  This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original but all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument.


[Remainder of page left intentionally blank]
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.
REPUBLIC AIRWAYS HOLDINGS INC.


By: /s/Mark L. Plaumann
Name: Mark L. Plaumann
Title:   Chairman of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors




TIMOTHY P. DOOLEY


/s/Timothy P. Dooley    



I/3515232.2
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350   In connection with the Annual Report of Proper Power and Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Joseph E. Abdo, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, to my knowledge that:  (i)  the accompanying Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Act); and  (ii)  the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  PROPER POWER AND ENERGY, INC.  /s/:  Joseph E. Abdo JOSEPH E. ABDO, Chief Executive Officer   March 30, 2011
STRATS Trust For Allstate Corporation Securities, Series 2006-3 - 10-K

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION



I,Barbara
Garafalo, certify that:



1.          I have reviewed this
report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K
of STRATS Trust For Allstate Corporation Securities, Series 2006-3 (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);



2.          Based on my knowledge,
the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do 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,
all of the distribution, servicing and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this
report is included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;



4.          Based on my knowledge
and the servicer compliance statement required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the
Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects;
and



5.          All of the reports on
assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment
of compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item
1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report
on Form 10-K.



In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on information
provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee.





|Dated: March 31, 2017 | By: | /s/ Barbara Garafalo                                     
|--------------------- | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|                      |     | Barbara Garafalo                                         
|                      |     | Vice President                                           
|                      |     | (senior officer of depositor in charge of securitization)
Execution Copy

June 30, 2000

U.S.
Bank National Association
610 Second Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402

Ladies
and Gentlemen:

Reference
is made to that certain amended and restated letter credit facility agreement dated as of March 18, 1998, as amended by letter amendments dated May 6, 1998,
August 14, 1998, February 18, 1999 and March 29, 2000 ( as so amended, the "Credit Agreement"), between Osmonics, Inc., a Minnesota corporation (the "Borrower") and U.S.
Bank National Association (f/k/a First Bank National Association), a national banking association ("U.S. Bank," or in its capacity as agent for the Banks described in the Credit Agreement, the
"Agent"). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as defined in the Credit Agreement. The Borrower desires to amend the Credit Agreement with respect to certain
provisions thereof.

Section
1.Amendments to Credit Agreement.Subject to Section 4 hereof, the Credit Agreement is amended
as follows:



|Measurement Period                       |  | Maximum Leverage Ratio
|---------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|April 1, 2000 through September 30, 2000 |  | 3.25 to 1.00          
|October 1, 2000, and thereafter          |  | 2.75 to 1.00          



---



Section
2.[Reserved]

Section
3.Representations and Warranties of the Borrower.To induce the Banks to enter into this
Amendment and to make and maintain the Revolving Loans under the Credit Agreement as amended hereby, the Borrower hereby warrants and represents to the Banks that it is duly authorized to execute and
deliver this Amendment, and to perform its obligations under the Credit Agreement as amended hereby, and that this Amendment constitutes the legal, valid and binding obligation of the Borrower,
enforceable in accordance with its terms.

Section
4.Conditions to the Effectiveness of this Amendment.This Amendment shall not become effective
until, and shall become effective when, each and every one of the following conditions shall have been satisfied:



Notwithstanding
any provision hereof, this Amendment shall terminate and the Agent and the Banks shall have no obligation hereunder if the forgoing conditions precedent are not
satisfied by 4:00 p.m. (Minneapolis time) June 30, 2000, provided, however, that the obligations of the Companies under Section 5.2 of this Amendment shall survive any such
termination.

2

---

Upon satisfaction of all of the foregoing, (a) the Agent shall notify the Borrower and the Banks that this Amendment has become effective, but the failure of the Agent to give
such notice shall not affect the validity of this Amendment or prevent it from becoming effective, and (b) the Agent shall cause to
be returned to the Borrower such of the Collateral (as defined in the Security Agreement) as shall not have been sold or otherwise applied pursuant to the terms hereof or the Termination Agreement.

Section
5.General.



Accepted
and agreed to as of the day and year first above written.



3

---
EXHIBIT 31.4
                       CERTIFICATION

I, Steven D. Davis, certify that:

1.	I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Southern
California Gas Company;

2.	Based on my knowledge, this Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report;

3.	Based on my knowledge, the financial statements and other financial
information included in this Quarterly Report fairly present in all
material respects the financial condition, results of operations and
cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented
in this Quarterly Report;

4.	The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
registrant and we 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 the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this Quarterly Report is being
prepared;

b)	Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this Quarterly Report
our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this Quarterly Report, based on such evaluation; and

c)	Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting;

5.	The registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

a)	All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal controls over financial
reporting which are reasonably 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
or other employees who have a significant role in the
registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.

November 4, 2004

/S/ STEVEN D. DAVIS
Steven D. Davis
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 11

                      SPARTECH CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                      (In thousands, except per share data)

                                 QUARTER ENDED      SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                  May 4,   May 5,     May 4,   May 5,
                                 2002      2001      2002      2001

NET EARNINGS
  Basic net earnings           $   9,074  $ 10,123  $ 13,936  $ 18,678
  Add:  Distributions on
   Preferred Securities,
   net of tax                        512     1,584       512     2,086

  Diluted net earnings             9,586    11,707    14,448    20,764

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES
 OUTSTANDING
  Basic weighted average common
   shares outstanding             26,868    26,652    26,809    26,663
  Add:  Shares issuable from
   assumed conversion of
   Preferred Stock                 1,637     4,578       818     3,107
  Add:  Shares issuable from
   assumed exercise of options       554       363       511       345

  Diluted weighted average
   shares outstanding             29,059    31,592    28,138    30,116


NET EARNINGS PER SHARE

  Basic                         $    .34  $    .38  $    .52  $    .70
  Diluted                       $    .33  $    .37  $    .51  $    .69
Exhibit 4.39

 

Madeira Energia S.A. – Share Purchase Agreement

 

Madeira Energia S.A. (‘Mesa’) is a special-purpose company formed to hold the concession for construction and operation of the Santo Antônio Hydroelectric Project, on the Madeira River, in the municipality of Porto Velho, in the state of Rondônia, in the North of Brazil, with installed generation capacity of 3,150.4 MW. Works on the project began in 2008. Cemig GT owns 10% of the equity of this company.

 

On March 11, 2014, the investment fund Fundo de Investimento em Participações Melbourne – ‘FIP Melbourne’, in which Cemig GT is a unit holder, represented by Banco Modal S.A., as purchaser, signed a share purchase agreement with Andrade Gutierrez Participações S.A. (‘AGP’) as vendor, for acquisition, subject to certain conditions being complied with, of 83% (eighty three per cent) of the total equity and 49% (forty nine  per cent) of the voting stock of SAAG Investimentos S.A. (“SAAG”). By the completion date of the transaction (“the Closing Date”), SAAG will own 12.4% (twelve point four per cent) of Madeira Energia S.A. (‘Mesa’).  The transaction was the subject of a decision by the Board of Directors of Cemig GT on March 6, 2014.

 

The acquisition will be structured through Equity Investment Funds (‘FIPs’), and other vehicles, in which Cemig GT will have minority stockholdings. Thus Cemig will not have more than 50% of the voting stock in any vehicle, and no more than 50% of the net asset value of any of the FIPs, thus preserving the private-sector nature of the structure.

 

The price of this acquisition will be R$ 835,384,911 (eight hundred thirty five million three hundred eighty four thousand nine hundred and eleven Reais), which will undergo monetary adjustment by the IPCA (Amplified National Consumer Price) Index from December 31, 2013 up to the Closing Date, augmented by any capital injections made by AGP into SAAG up to the Closing Date, less any dividends declared by SAAG to AGP up to the Closing date.

 

Conclusion of the transaction is subject to other conditions precedent, including approvals by the Brazilian monopolies authority (Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica, or Cade) and the Brazilian electricity regulator, Aneel.