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

      ( print page 60285)    

# Agency Holding The Meeting:

Federal Maritime Commission. 

# Time And Date:

October 15, 2008—10 a.m. 

# Place:

800 North Capitol Street, NW., First Floor Hearing Room, Washington, DC. 

# Status:

A portion of the meeting will be in Open Session and the remainder of the meeting will be in Closed Session. 

## Matters To Be Considered 

### Open Session 

(1) Docket No. 06-06—EuroUSA Shipping, Inc., Tober Group, Inc., and Container Innovations, Inc. Possible Violations of Section 10 of the Shipping Act of 1984 and Commission's Regulations at 46 CFR 515.27. 

                    (2) Docket No. 06-09—Parks International Shipping, Inc., Cargo Express International Shipping Inc.,                     *et al.,*                     Possible Violations of  Sections 8(a) and 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 and Commission's Regulation at 46 CFR Parts 515 and 520.                 

### Closed Session 

(1) FMC Agreement No. 201170-001, LA/Long Beach Port Infrastructure & Environmental Cooperative Working Agreement. 

(2) Docket No. 08-05—City of Los Angeles, California, Harbor Department of the City of Los Angeles, Board of Harbor Commissioners of the City of Los Angeles, City of Long Beach, California, Harbor Department of the City of Long Beach, and the Board of Harbor Commissioners of the City of Long Beach—Possible Violations of Sections 10(b)(10), 10(d)(1) and 10(d)(4) of the Shipping Act of 1984. 

(3) Internal Administrative Practices and Personnel Matters. 

# Contact Person for More Information:

Karen V. Gregory, Secretary, (202) 523-5725. 

Karen V. Gregory, 

Secretary.

 [FR Doc. E8-24325 Filed 10-8-08; 4:15 pm] 

BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
#### CITY OF MIAMI BEACH v. HANSLEY.

Supreme Court of Florida.

January Term 1954.

Certiorari denied without opinion.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS AND GEOLOGISTS








We hereby consent to the inclusion in this Amendment No. 2 on Form 10-K/A to Gastar Exploration Ltd.'s and Gastar Exploration USA, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2012, of our report dated September 17, 2013, with respect to estimates of reserves and future net revenue of Gastar Exploration Ltd., as of December 31, 2012.








NETHERLAND, SEWELL & ASSOCIATES, INC.








By:/s/ G. Lance BinderG. Lance Binder, P.E.Executive Vice President











Dallas, Texas


October 21, 2013
#### FLORIDA COCA COLA BOTTLING CO. v. HOTCKIN.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.4

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                              EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                                    --------
                                  APRIL 1, 2000



THIS AMENDMENT is made as of April 1, 2000 ("Commencement Date"), and is by and
between Getty Images, Inc. (the "Company") and A.D. "Bud" Albers (the
"Employee").


WHEREAS the Company and the Employee desire to amend the Employment Agreement
dated October 11, 1999 (the "Agreement");


THEREFORE the Company AND the Employee agree to delete Section 3 (a) in its
entirety and replace it as follows:


        3. (a) SALARY. The Company shall pay to the Employee an annual salary
(the "Salary") at the initial rate of Two Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars
($250,000.00), payable to the Employee in accordance with the normal payroll
practices of the Company for its employees as are in effect from time to time.
The amount of the Employee's Salary shall be reviewed annually by the Company on
or about April 1 of each year during the Term beginning in the 2000 calendar
year.


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Getty Images, Inc. and A.D. "Bud" Albers have caused this
Amendment to be executed as of the Commencement Date.



GETTY IMAGES, INC.                              A.D. ALBERS



By:
    ---------------------------------           --------------------------------
        Jonathan Klein, CEO                               A.D. Albers


Date:
    ---------------------------------           --------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           1,699
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   13,716
<ALLOWANCES>                                       678
<INVENTORY>                                     14,510
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                35,155
<PP&E>                                          22,841
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,527
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  92,961
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,538
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           136
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,594
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    92,961
<SALES>                                         24,083
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                24,083
<CGS>                                           14,808
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,463
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 342
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,696)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,288)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,408)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,408)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.18)


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

HONORABLE MARCIA S. KRIEGER

Courtroom Deputy: Patricia Glover Date: June 25, 2012

Court Reporter: Paul Zuckerman

Probation Officer: Jeannette Woll

Interpreter: Malinda Gonzales-Hibner

Criminal Action No. 11-cr-00396-MSK

Parties: Counsel:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Mark Barrett

Plaintiff,

v.

FERNANDEZ VALENTE CHAVEZPEREZ,Edward Pluss

Defendant.

SENTENCING MINUTES

______________________________________________________________________________

 11:04 a.m. Court in session.

Defendant present in custody.

Interpreter sworn.

Change of Plea Hearing on November 21, 2012. Defendant pled guilty to Count 1 of the

Indictment.

Parties received and reviewed the presentence report and all addenda.

The parties do not dispute the facts contained in the presentence report.

The parties do not dispute the calculation of the sentence under the Federal Sentencing

Guidelines as set forth in the original presentence report.

The parties do not request departure.

The parties do contend that the sentence should be different from that calculated under the

Sentencing Guidelines in light of the sentencing objectives set forth in 18 U.S.C. Section

3553(a). (Doc. #26, #34). Agrument.

Allocution. - Statements made by: The Government, the defendant, defense counsel.

Case 1:11-cr-00396-MSK Document 35 Filed 06/25/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Sentencing Minutes

Judge Marcia S. Krieger

Page 2

After consideration of the provisions of 18 U.S.C. 3553 (a), the Court announces the sentence it

intends to impose as reflected in the record. Counsel are offered the opportunity for further

argument. No further argument.

ORDER: Motion at Doc. #31 is WITHDRAWN. Motions for Variance (Doc. #26, #34)

are GRANTED.

THE DEFENDANT IS SENTENCED AS REFLECTED IN THE RECORD.

The defendant is advised of his right to appeal.

ORDER: Defendant is remanded to the custody of the United States Marshal for the

District of Colorado.

11:24 a.m. Court in recess.

Total Time: 20 minutes.

Hearing concluded.

Case 1:11-cr-00396-MSK Document 35 Filed 06/25/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 4.1
                                                                     -----------

                              (Bancorp Letterhead)


                              PACIFIC STATE BANCORP



March 24, 2004

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, DC 20549

Re:      Pacific State Bancorp
         Commission File No. 000-49892

To whom it may concern:

         Pursuant to the requirements set forth in paragraph (b)(4)(iii) of item
601 of Regulation S-K, and in connection with the filing of its Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003, Pacific State Bancorp hereby
agrees to file with the Commission, upon request, a copy of the Company's
Indenture dated March 17, 2004, for its $3.5 Million in principal amount of
Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Debentures due 2034, issued to Pacific State
Statutory Trust II.


PACIFIC STATE BANCORP


By: /s/ STEVEN A. ROSSO
    ------------------------------
    Steven A. Rosso, President/CEO

                                       70
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 12

- 00200

- CV

Kandy E. SWAIM

, Appellant

v.

Robert M. SWAIM , Jr.,

Appellee

From the 406th Judicial District Court

, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2009

- CVG

- 000185

- D4

Honorable Oscar J

. Hale, Jr. , Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 31, 2012

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal , stating that both appellant and

appellee are informing the court that they have settled their dispute. Therefore, we grant the

motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a). Costs of appeal are taxed aga inst

appellant. See id. 42.1(d).

PER CURIAM
110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 159

AN ACT

To redesignate the White Rocks National Recreation Area

in the State of Vermont as the ‘‘Robert T. Stafford

White Rocks National Recreation Area’’.

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

2

S 159 ES

1 SECTION 1. ROBERT T. STAFFORD WHITE ROCKS NATIONAL

2 RECREATION AREA.

3 (a) REDESIGNATION.—The White Rocks National

4 Recreation Area in the State of Vermont, as established

5 by section 202 of the Vermont Wilderness Act of 1984

6 (16 U.S.C. 460nn–1), is redesignated as the ‘‘Robert T.

7 Stafford White Rocks National Recreation Area’’.

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United

10 States to the recreation area referred to in subsection (a)

11 shall be deemed to be a reference to the Robert T. Stafford

12 White Rocks National Recreation Area.

Passed the Senate January 4, 2007.

Attest:

Secretary.
110TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 159

AN ACT

To redesignate the White Rocks National RecreArea’’. ert T. Stafford White Rocks National Recreation ation Area in the State of Vermont as the ‘‘Rob-
**
EXHIBIT 31.1 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) OF THE SECURITIES**

**EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934**

I,Anthony R. Cerasoli, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports onForm 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of First National Master Note Trust (the “Exchange Act periodicreports”); 

2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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. I amresponsible for reviewing the activities performed by the servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and exceptas disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled their obligations under the servicing agreements 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 onassessment 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 byU.S. Bank National Association. 
**

Dated: March 26, 2020   /s/ Anthony R. Cerasoli   Anthony R. Cerasoli, Senior Vice President and Treasurer, First National Bank of Omaha (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the servicer)
[Signature page to Certification Pursuant to Rule 13a-14/15d-14(d)

of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934]
#### DAVIS v. UNION NAT. LIFE INS. CO.

No. 7731.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

Nov. 2, 1951.

Jackson, Mayer & Kennedy, Shreveport, for’ appellant.

Percy & Macmurdo, Baton Rouge, Garrett & Pleasant, Shreveport, for appellee.

HARDY, Judge.

This is a suit by plaintiff as beneficiary under a policy of accident insurance issued by defendant insuring the life of one Le-Roy Watt, decedent. Exceptions of no right and no cause of action were interposed on behalf of defendant, which exceptions were sustained, and there was judgment dismissing plaintiff’s demands, from which judgment plaintiff prosecutes this appeal.

.The pertinent allegations of plaintiff’s petition aver that the insured, LeRoy Watt, was struck and killed by a truck while the said assured was standing on a strip of ground located between the sidewalk and the curb of the paved portion of the street in the 1100 block of Caddo Street in the City of Shreveport, Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

The pertinent provisions of the policy with respect to the liability of the insurer read as follows:

> “If the insured shall as a result of being struck by the vehicle itself * * * while the insured is walking, standing or riding a bicycle on the actual surface of a public highway as hereafter defined.

> * * * * ****

> . “Public Highway as used herein shall mean the traveled and improved portion of the highway open to the public generally for vehicular traffic * *

A survey of Caddo Street at the point of the accident, definitely fixing the location of decedent at tlie time he was struck, was attached to and filed with the supplemental and amended petition of plaintiff. The plot of the survey shows that LeRoy Watt was standing between the curb line of the street and a four foot sidewalk; in other words, he was on what is customarily designated as the neutral ground between the sidewalk intended for pedestrians and the street intended and used for vehicular traffic.

In our opinion the above quoted provisions of the policy, which was the contract between the parties, are clearly controlling. They are plain, clear and unambiguous. It is quite true that the coverage of the policy is exceedingly limited, but this close circumscription can only be held to have been within the contemplation of the parties at the time of making the agreement. Certainly the decedent was not occupying any .part of the actual surface of a public highway as designated in the policy at the time of the accident. Accordingly, the conclusion is inescapable that no liability attached under the policy.

The judgment appealed from is affirmed at appellant’s cost.
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

LIZA NICHOLS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

BLANK SPACE )

) C.A. No. N20C-09-166 MMJ

)

CHRISTIANA CARE SERVICES, )

)

Defendant. )

Submitted: April 20, 2021

Decided: April 27, 2021

To Determine if the Affidavit of Merit

Complies with 18 Del. C. §§ 6853(a)(1) and (c)

and 

Plaintiff’s Motion for a Continuance

ORDER

Section 6853(a)(1) of title 18 of the Delaware Code provides that all 

healthcare negligence complaints must be accompanied by an affidavit of merit as 

to each defendant signed by an expert witness, accompanied by a current curriculum 

vitae of the witness, stating that there are reasonable grounds to believe that there 

has been healthcare medical negligence committed by each defendant. 
In this case, an affidavit of merit was filed.1

 Pursuant to 18 Del. C. § 6853(d), 

the Court has determined to perform an in camera review of the affidavit to 

determine compliance with sections 6853(a)(1) and (c). The Court has reviewed the 

affidavit of merit and the accompanying curriculum vitae. The Court finds:

1. The affidavit is signed by a Nursing Assistant.

2. The affidavit is not accompanied by a current curriculum vitae.

3. The affidavit sets forth the affiant’s opinion that there are reasonable 

grounds to believe that the applicable standard of care was breached by the named 

defendant.

4. The affidavit fails to set forth the affiant’s opinion that there are 

reasonable grounds to believe that specifically enumerated breaches proximately 

caused the injuries claimed in the complaint. 

5. The affiant was not licensed to practice medicine as of the date of the 

affidavit.

6. The affidavit fails to state whether in the 3 years immediately preceding 

the alleged negligent act, the affiant was engaged in the treatment of patients and/or 

in the teaching/academic side of medicine.

7. The affidavit does not state that the affiant is board certified.

1The Affidavit of Merit should have been, but was not, filed under seal. However, the Court has 

determined to seal the Affidavit of Merit sua sponte.
THEREFORE, the Court having reviewed in camera the affidavit of merit, 

the Court finds that the affidavit of merit does not comply with sections 6853(a)(1) 

and (c) of title 18 of the Delaware Code. Plaintiff’s Motion for a continuance is 

hereby DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Mary M. Johnston

The Honorable Mary M. Johnston
##### 



Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, John S. Chen, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sybase, Inc.;

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 officers 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 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 changes in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by this report
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     The registrants other certifying officers 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.

Date: August 14, 2003

|                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------
|/s/ JOHN S. CHEN                                  
|                                                  
|John S. Chen
Chief Executive Officer and President

51
#### Smith, Appellant, *v.*Peoples Natural Gas Co.

Argued Oct. 26, 1914.

March 1, 1915:

Appeal, No. 44, Oct. T., 1914, by plaintiff, from judgment of O. P. Allegheny Co., June T., 1911, No. 131, on directed verdict for defendant, in case of O. J. Smith, now Elmer A. Smith, administrator of the estate of O. J. Smith v. Peoples Natural Gas Company.

Before Brown, C. J., Potter, Elkin, Moschzisker and Frazer, JJ.

Affirmed.

Trespass to recover damages for injuries resulting from an explosion of natural gas in plaintiff’s dwelling. Before Reid, J.

The facts appear in Windish v. Gas Company, 248 Pa. 236, and in Pouder v. Gas Company, 248 Pa. 242.

Verdict for defendant by direction of the court and judgment thereon. Plaintiff appealed.

*Error assigned*was in directing a verdict for defendant.

• *William E. Hague*and *Joseph F. Mayhugh,*with thém *George Weil*and *James G. Nevin,*for appellant.

*William A. Stone,*of *Stone & Stone,*with him *Christy Payne,*for appellee.

Opinion, by

Mr. Justice Elkin,

For the reasons stated'in the opinions just handed down in Windish v. Peoples Natural Gas Company, and in Pouder against same company, the contention of appellant in the present case cannot be sustained. The *247facts are tbe same in all essential particulars and there is no distinction-in principle between the cases.

Judgment affirmed.