alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
exv10w25w2



 








Exhibit 10.25.2




	 	 	 
	AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.

	 	Medicaid HMO Contract






AHCA CONTRACT NO. FA523

AMENDMENT NO. 2




     THIS CONTRACT, entered into between the STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE
ADMINISTRATION, hereinafter referred to as the “Agency” and AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.,
hereinafter referred to as the “Vendor”, is hereby amended as follows:




	1.  	Attachment I, section 10.5, Optional Services, the first item, Dental Services, is hereby
amended to now read:





	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	Covered
	 	Not Covered	 	 
	 
	Dental Services

	 	o	 	þ
	 	 







	2.  	This amendment shall begin on November 19, 2004, or the date on which the amendment has
been signed by both parties, whichever is later.





     All provisions in the Contract and any attachments thereto in conflict with this amendment
shall be and are hereby changed to conform with this amendment.



     All provisions not in conflict with this amendment are still in effect and are to be performed
at the level specified in the Contract.



     This amendment and all its attachments are hereby made a part of the Contract.



     This amendment cannot be executed unless all previous amendments to this Contract have been
fully executed.



     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this 1 page amendment (including all
attachments) to be executed by their officials thereunto duly authorized.



	 	 	 	 	 
	AMERIGROUP OF FLORIDA, INC.

	 	STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR
	

	 	 	HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION
	 
	 	 
	SIGNED

	 	 	SIGNED	 
	BY:

	 	 	BY:	 
	 	 

	 	 	 
	 
	 	 
	NAME:  

	 	 	NAME:  	Alan Levine
	 	 

	 	 	 
	 
	 	 
	TITLE:

	 	 	TITLE: 	Secretary
	 	 	 	 	 
	 
	 	 
	DATE:

	 	 	DATE:	 
	

	 	 	 	 






THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY




AHCA Contract No. FA523, Amendment No. 2, Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7092

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ISAAC PERRY, a/k/a Ike,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, District Judge.

(CR-93-42-F)

Submitted: November 18, 1999 Decided: November 24, 1999

Before WILKINS, HAMILTON, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part and dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam

opinion.

Isaac Perry, Appellant Pro Se. Robert Edward Skiver, Assistant

United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order denying the motion for

a writ of error coram nobis is marked as “filed” on May 3, 1999,

the district court’s records show that the order was entered on the

docket sheet on May 7, 1999. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and

79(a), we consider the date the order was entered as the effective

date of the district court’s decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806

F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Isaac Perry appeals the district court's orders denying his

motion for a writ of error coram nobis and his motion to reconsider. We dismiss the appeal from the order denying the motion for

a writ of error coram nobis for lack of jurisdiction and affirm the

order denying the motion to reconsider.

In civil actions in which the United States or an officer or

agency thereof is a party, all parties are accorded sixty days

after the entry of the district court's final judgment or order to

note an appeal, see Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1), unless the district

court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5) or

reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is "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)).

The district court's order denying the motion for a writ of

error coram nobis was entered on the docket on May 7, 1999.*

Perry's notice of appeal was filed on August 3, 1999. Because

Perry failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an ex-
3

tension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss this portion

of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

With regard to Perry's appeal of the district court's order

denying his motion to reconsider, we have reviewed the record and

the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

United States v. Perry, No. CR-93-42-F (E.D.N.C. July 19, 1999).

We deny Perry’s motion for an enlargement of time to file an

informal reply brief and 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.

AFFIRMED IN PART AND DISMISSED IN PART
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 174 (Monday, September 8, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20680]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


National Register of Historic Places;Notification of Pending 
Nominations and Related Actions

    Nominations for the following properties being considered for 
listing or related actions in the National Register were received by 
the National Park Service before August 23, 2008.
    Pursuant to Sec.  60.13 of 36 CFR Part 60 written comments 
concerning the significance of these properties under the National 
Register criteria for evaluation may be forwarded by United States 
Postal Service, to the National Register of Historic Places, National 
Park Service, 1849 C St., NW., 2280, Washington, DC 20240; by all other 
carriers, National Register of Historic Places, National Park 
Service,1201 Eye St., NW., 8th floor, Washington DC 20005; or by fax, 
202-371-6447. Written or faxed comments should be submitted by 
September 23, 2008.

J. Paul Loether,
Chief, National Register of Historic Places/National Historic Landmarks 
Program.

ALABAMA

Montgomery County

Frazier Hill, 6716 Old Selma Rd., Antioch, 08000951

ARKANSAS

Drew County

Ridgeway Hotel Historic District, 200-206 East Gaines St., 
Monticello, 08000952

Hempstead County

Southwestern Proving Ground Building <greek-i>129, (World War II 
Home Front Efforts in Arkansas) 195 Hempstead Co. Rd. 279, Hope, 
08000953

Jackson County

Erwin Auxiliary Army Airfield (World War II Home Front Efforts in 
Arkansas), NE. of AR 14 and Jackson Rd. 917 jct., Newport, 08000954

Sebastian County

Greenwood Presbyterian Church, 103 W. Denver St., Greenwood, 
08000955

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

District of Columbia

Slayton, William L., House, 3411 Ordway St., NW., Washington DC, 
08000956

FLORIDA

St. Johns County

Fort Matanzas NM Headquarters and Visitor Center (Florida's New Deal 
Resources MPS), 8635 A1A S., St.Augustine, 08000957

ILLINOIS

Cook County

Cicero Fire House No. 2, 129 Lake St., Oak Park, 08000959

Sauganash Historic District, Bounded on the W. by the former alley 
to the W. of Kilpatrick Ave., Hiawatha Ave., andKeating Ave., 
Chicago, 08000958

MISSOURI

Jackson County

Aines Farm Dairy Building, 3110-30 Gillham Rd., Kansas City, 
08000960

TEXAS

Hall County

Hall County Courthouse, 512 W. Main, Memphis, 08000961

Hidalgo County

M and J Nelson Building, 300-308 S. 14th St., McAllen, 08000962

WISCONSIN

Richland County

Shadewald II Mound Group, (Late Woodland Stage in Archeological 
Region 8 MPS) Address Restricted, Town of Eagle, 08000963
[FR Doc. E8-20680 Filed 9-5-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 175 (Tuesday, September 9, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 52262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-20883]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Meeting of the Land Between The Lakes Advisory Board

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Land Between The Lakes Advisory Board will hold a meeting 
on Thursday, October 2, 2008. Notice of this meeting is given under the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App.2.
    The meeting agenda includes the following:
    (1) Welcome/Introductions;
    (2) Members visit areas in Land Between The Lakes;
    (3) Board discussion on morning visits relating to dispersed 
recreation/education;
    (4) Update on Nature Watch;
    (5) LBL Updates;
    (6) Board Discussion of Comments Received.
    The meeting is open to the public. Written comments are invited and 
may be mailed to: William P. Lisowsky, Area Supervisor, Land Between 
The Lakes, 100 Van Morgan Drive, Golden Pond, Kentucky 42211. Written 
comments must be received at Land Between The Lakes by September 25, 
2008, in order for copies to be provided to the members at the meeting. 
Board members will review written comments received, and at their 
request, oral clarification may be requested at a future meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held on October 2, 2008, 1 p.m. to 3:30 
p.m., CDT.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Land Between The Lakes 
Administrative Building, Golden Pond, Kentucky, and will be open to the 
public.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sharon Byers, Advisory Board Liaison, 
Land Between The Lakes, 100 Van Morgan Drive, Golden Pond, Kentucky 
42211, 270-924-2002.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the morning of October 2, 2008, Advisory 
Board members will visit various locations throughout Land Between The 
Lakes to research dispersed recreation/education opportunities. These 
visits will be done in small groups to different locations; the full 
board will not be visiting the same location. No official business of 
the board will take place during these morning visits.

    Dated: September 5, 2008.
William P. Lisowsky,
Area Supervisor, Land Between The Lakes.
[FR Doc. E8-20883 Filed 9-8-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NATIONAL
PRESTO INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   APR-04-1999
<CASH>                                              78,380
<SECURITIES>                                       148,989
<RECEIVABLES>                                       11,503
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         14,700
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   253,780
<PP&E>                                              22,557
<DEPRECIATION>                                      11,793
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     275,441
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               32,385
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             7,441
<OTHER-SE>                                         235,615
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       275,441
<SALES>                                             21,610
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                    21,610
<CGS>                                               15,436
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       15,436
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      4,040
<INCOME-TAX>                                           760
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  3,280
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                         3,280
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         0.45
        


</TABLE>
JMK

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 18-0543

STATE OF MONTANA, 

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

ALAN PETER TWARDOSKI,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 60-day extension of time, 

and good cause appearing therefor, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to 

and including June 22, 2020, within which to prepare, serve, and file its response 

brief.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 14 2020

04/14/2020

Case Number: DA 18-0543
EXHIBIT 31.1
**CERTIFICATION**
I, Max A. Coon, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Maxco, Inc.;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;
4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
b) [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]
c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosures controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’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 asignificant role in the registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.   Date:  February 14,  2005      /s/ Max A. Coon   Max A. Coon Chief Executive Officer
WITHDRAWN 1

- 29

- 15 

### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 14

- 00327

- CV

DEFENSE RESOURCE SER VICES, LLC , Appellant

v.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF CENTRAL TEXAS , Appellee

From the 170th District Court McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2013

- 3668

- 4

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Defense Resource Services, LLC, appeals from a judgment entered in favor of appellee, First National Bank of Central Texas. However, appellant has not filed a docketing statement. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 32.1.
In a letter dated November 21, 2014, the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the docketing statement must be filed within twenty

- one days from the date of the letter. The letter also warned appellant that if the docketing statement was not filedDefense Resource Services, LLC v. First National Bank of Central Texas Page 2

within twenty

- one days from the date o f the letter, the appeal would be dismissed

without further notification. See id. at R. 42.3(b)

- (c), 44.3. More than twenty

- one days have passed, and we have not received the docketing statement. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. See id. at R. 42.3 (b)

- (c).

AL SCOGGINS Justice Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins Appeal dismissed Opinion delivered and filed January 15 , 2015 [CV06]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    In accordance with § 271.25 of its rules regarding availability of information (12 CFR part 271), there is set forth below the domestic policy directive issued by the Federal Open Market Committee at its meeting held on August 5, 2008.1

                    The Federal Open Market Committee seeks monetary and financial conditions that will foster price stability and                           ( print page 51820)                        promote sustainable growth in output. To further its long-run objectives, the Committee in the immediate future seeks conditions in reserve markets consistent with maintaining the federal funds rate at an average of around 2 percent.                

By order of the Federal Open Market Committee, August 26, 2008.

Brian F. Madigan,

Secretary, Federal Open Market Committee.

# Footnotes

1.                             Copies of the Minutes of the Federal Open Market Committee meeting on August 5, 2008, which includes the domestic policy directive issued at the meeting, are available upon request to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Washington, D.C. 20551. The minutes are published in the Federal Reserve Bulletin and in the Board's annual report.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. E8-20558 Field 9-4-08; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.4

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Prime Hospitality Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, A. F.
Petrocelli, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted 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.

/s/ A. F. Petrocelli
    ----------------

A. F. Petrocelli
Chief Executive Officer
May 14, 2003
#### Props For Today, Inc., Respondent, v Maxine Kaplan et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Greenfield, J.), entered on or about August 26, 1989, which granted plaintiff’s motion pursuant to CPLR 6301 for a preliminary injunction to the extent of enjoining defendants from soliciting any of plaintiff’s customers or placing orders with any of plaintiff’s suppliers and denied defendant Kaplan’s cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Order of the same court entered on or about February 1, 1990, which denied defendants’ motion for leave to reargue the prior motion and denied, *sub silentio,*defendants’ motion for leave to file a second answer to the complaint, unanimously affirmed as to the latter, and the appeal from the former is dismissed as from a nonappealable order, with costs.

Plaintiff rents visual properties (props) for photography, motion pictures and video. Plaintiff specializes in props consisting of kitchen fixtures and decorative accessories, and its clientele is unique in this regard. Defendant Kaplan is a former employee who has founded a competing props company.

Plaintiff has presented persuasive circumstantial evidence, *178supported by specific facts, by documentation, and by the affidavits of several witnesses, that defendant Kaplan misappropriated confidential information concerning photography stylists and prop masters who particularly favor renting kitchenware props, and concerning suppliers who will sell individual items of kitchenware to prop companies at wholesale prices. Defendant Kaplan has selectively denied certain allegations, but many of the more serious allegations stood without categorical denial until the appealing defendants’ reply papers on the motion to reargue.

The preliminary injunction was properly granted, summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied, reargument was properly denied, and the motion for leave to file a second answer (as to which no argument was actually presented to the IAS court or on appeal) was properly denied. Plaintiff showed a likelihood of success on the merits, a substantial risk of irreparable injury, and a balance of the equities in its favor *(Primo Enter, v Bachner,*148 AD2d 350, 351). Cases in which customer lists are publicly available *(see, e.g., Arc-Com Fabrics v Robinson,*149 AD2d 311) are distinguishable, since although defendants have shown that general lists of photo stylists and prop masters are available to the public, they have not, however, refuted plaintiff’s showing that only it has listings of those clients interested in its specialized inventory, and of those wholesale distributors willing to accommodate it.

Plaintiff’s showing of a likelihood of success on the merits is sufficient. Plaintiff has not shown that its success is certain, but it is in no way obliged to do so *(Parkmed Co. v Pro-Life Counseling,*91 AD2d 551, 553).

We have considered defendants’ other arguments, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Kassal, Ellerin, Smith and Rubin, JJ.