alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 15

                       TO CYPRUS AMAX MINERALS COMPANY'S
                         QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
                   FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1997

                                     -20-
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 15

November 13, 1997

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

We are aware that Cyprus Amax Minerals Company has included our report dated
November 13, 1997 (issued pursuant to the provisions of Statement on Auditing
Standards Nos. 71), in the Quarterly Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
1997, which is incorporated by reference in each of the following:

  (a) Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-1600, 33-22939 and 33-53792)
      with respect to Cyprus Amax Minerals Company Savings Plan and Trust.

  (b) Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-1603, 33-21501 and 33-53794)
      with respect to the Management Incentive Program of Cyprus Amax Minerals
      Company and its participating subsidiaries.

  (c) Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-52812) with respect to the
      Stock Plan for Non-Employee Directors of Cyprus Amax Minerals Company.

  (d) Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-51011) with respect to the 1988
      Amended and Restated Stock Option Plan of Cyprus Amax Minerals Company.

  (e) Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-61141) with respect to the
      Cyprus Amax Minerals Company Thrift Plan for Bargaining Unit Employees.

  (f) Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3
      (No. 33-36413) with respect to the Cyprus Amax Minerals Company Savings
      Plan and Trust.

  (g) Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3
      (No. 33-54097), as amended,  with respect to Cyprus Amax Minerals Company
      and Cyprus Amax Finance Corporation.

  (h) Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3
      (No. 33-54097) with respect to Cyprus Amax Minerals Company $250 million
      7 3/8 percent Notes due May 15, 2007.

  (i) Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3
      (No. 33-62145) with respect to Cyprus Amax Minerals Company and Cyprus
      Amax Finance Corporation $600 million Shelf Registration.

We are also aware of our responsibilities under the Securities Act of 1933.

Yours very truly,


/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP

                                     -21-
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 Certifications 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 Annual Report of Digital Cinema Destinations, Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2012, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we A. Dale Mayo, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Company, and Brian Pflug, Chief Financial 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, to our knowledge, that:
 (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 results of operations of the Company.
 
 By: /s/ A. Dale Mayo
 A. Dale Mayo
 Chief Executive Officer and Chairman
   By:  /s/ Brian Pflug
 Brian Pflug
 Chief Financial Officer
  Dated:  September 24, 2012
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.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service 

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

                        Pursuant to the authorities in the Federal Advisory Committee Act                               ( print page 54298)                            (Pub. L. 92-463) and under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000 (Pub. L. 106-393) the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest's Tri-County Resource Advisory Committee will meet on Thursday September 23, 2010, from 5 p.m. until 8:30 p.m., in Deer Lodge, Montana. The purpose of the meeting is to review proposals for Title II funding and accomplishments for projects previously funded under Title II.                     

# DATES:

Thursday, September 23, 2010, from 5 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the USDA building located 1002 Hollenback Road, Deer Lodge, Montana (MT 59722). 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Patty Bates, Tri County Resource Advisory Committee Coordinator, Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, 420 Barrett Road, Dillon, MT 59725, (406) 683-3979; E-MAIL                         *pbates@fs.fed.us.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Agenda for this meeting include discussion about (1) accomplishments during 2010; (2) introduction and orientation for new Resource Advisory Committee members; and (3) budget, priorities and funding for new project proposals. The meeting is open to the public. Public input opportunity will be provided and individuals will have the opportunity to address the Committee at that time. 

Dated: August 24, 2010. 

David R. Myers, 

Designated Federal Official. 

[FR Doc. 2010-22113 Filed 9-3-10; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
EXHIBIT 21.1

|                                           |        |                |
|-------------------------------------------|--------|----------------|
| Name                                      |   | Jurisdiction   |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings I LLC    |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings II LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings V LLC    |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings VI LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings VII LLC  |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings VIII LLC |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings IX LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital Equity Holdings XI LLC   |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital PL Holdings LLC          |   | Delaware       |
| GIG Rooster Holdings I LLC                |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Funding 2018-2 Ltd.              |   | Cayman Islands |
| Garrison Funding 2018-2 LLC               |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC Holdco Inc.         |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC LP                  |   | Delaware       |
| Garrison Capital SBIC General Partner LLC |   | Delaware       |
|                                      |   |           |
#### Maynor, Appellant, *v.*Tran, Appellee.

(Decided April 24, 1939.)

*Mr. Alvin F. Weichel*and *Mr. Lewis L. Mar quart,*for appellant.

*Messrs. King, Flynn <& Frohman,*for appellee.

Carpenter, J.

This was an action for damages from personal injuries claimed to háve been negligently caused to plaintiff by an agent of defendant. At the close of plaintiff’s , evidence, the trial court directed a *28verdict and entered judgment for defendant for the reason that the alleged tort-feasor was an independent contractor and not an agent of the defendant. From this judgment plaintiff appealed on questions of law.

Defendant purchased a radio for his automobile, to be installed by the seller as a part of the purchase contract. The seller directed defendant to take his automobile to a certain garage where a mechanic would install the radio. This he did late in an afternoon and plaintiff accompanied him there as a guest. The mechanic said he would install the radio but would not have time that afternoon to tune out ■ motor noises, should there be any, but would do that the next day.

After having installed and connected the radio so it would play, the mechanic said to defendant, in substance, to use it and if there was motor noise he would fix it the next day. The defendant told him to “try it,” and when the mechanic pressed on the motor starter, the gears were in reverse and the automobile ran backward, struck and injured plaintiff, causing the damages complained of.

It is conceded the mechanic was an indepéndent contractor up to the time defendant told him to “try it”; then it is claimed he became the agent of the defendant, who was thereby liable for the damage to plaintiff.

Plaintiff, in making this contention, loses sight of the fact that the testing and noise correction of the radio were all a part of the contract of installation. All defendant did was to ask the mechanic to perform a little more of his contract that night instead of waiting until the next day, and the starting of the motor to test the installation at that time was only a little further performance of the contract, which, if not done that evening, would have been done later.

For this reason, the action of the trial court in directing a verdict was right and is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Overmyer and Lloyd, JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT
      10.5**





**PROMISSORY
      NOTE AMENDMENT**





**Dated
      as of June 30, 2006**





**Reference
      is made to that certain promissory note dated August 31, 2000 (the “Promissory
      Note”), as amended, between CenterStaging Musical Productions, Inc., a
      California corporation, (the “Issuer”), promising to pay to Paul Router, Trustee
      under the PREMIER CAREER MANAGEMENT CORPORATION DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
      for
      the Interests of Jan Paul Parent (“Payee”) with respect to the loan of $75,000
      at 10% interest per annum. All terms defined in the Promissory Note shall have
      the same meaning in this Amendment, except as otherwise provided
      herein.**





**NOW,
      THEREFORE, Borrower and Holders hereby agree to amend the Promissory Note as
      follows:**





**1)**  **The
      maturity date of the Promissory Note is hereby revised** ***ab
      initio*** **to May 31, 2007. Furthermore, the Payee agrees that the Issuer is not, and
      shall
      not be deemed to be, in default with respect to the original maturity date
      of
      the Promissory Note and the Payee hereby waive any right to demand immediate
      payment of the Promissory Note or any remedies in respect
      thereof.**





**2)**  **Payee
      acknowledges that various payments have been made against the original principal
      amount of $75,000 and that the outstanding balance at June 30, 2006 is
      $51,332.73.**





**2)**  **Except
      as expressly modified herein, the Promissory Note is hereby ratified and shall
      remain in full force and effect.**





**If
      Holders agree with the foregoing, please execute this amendment in the space
      below.**





**/s/
      Howard Livingston**


**Howard
      Livingston**


**CFO
      CenterStaging Musical Productions, Inc.**








**/s/
      Jan Paul Parent**


**Jan
      Paul Parent**


**Promissory
      Note Payee, an individual**
News United States Air Force
 Yesterday’s Air Force: WWII Heavy BombardmentPublished June 5, 2019
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                One of the costliest campaigns of World War II was the aerial bombing of the Axis powers in Europe. The American B-17 and B-24 bombers were the backbone of the Allied bombing campaign over Nazi occupied Europe.



</iframe

For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:
- **Boeing B-17F Memphis Belle**
- **Boeing B-17G Flying Fortress**
- **Consolidated B-24D Liberator**Airmen 



Airman 



Air Force 



Air Force TV 



stories 



military 



B-17 



B-24 



Memphis Belle 



P-51 



WWII 



World War 2 



bomber 



bombing 



bombs 



National Museum of the United States Air Force 



NMUSAF 



air force museum 



Jeff Duford 



Wright Patterson Air Force Base 



Wright Patt
#### CLARENCE GRIFFIN v. NEWARK HOUSING AUTHORITY.

July 11, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
A. L., Mother of Baby Girl L.,

Minor Child

,

Petitioner,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN

AND FAMILIES

,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 6

- 2545

Opinion filed July 12, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari

– Original Jurisdiction

.

Hilda J. Griffis, Office of Regional Conflict Counsel, Jacksonville; Jeffrey Lewis,

General Co unsel , Office of Criminal Conflict & Civil Regional Counsel and Susan

Barber, Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil

Regional Counsel , Tallahassee

, for Petitioner.

Ward L. Metzger, Appellate Counsel, Department of Child ren and Families,

Jacksonville, for Respondent

.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED.

BILBREY, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  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 operation of the Company.
 Date: September 10, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Mark R. SchonauMark R. SchonauActing Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
(Acting Principal Executive Officer
and Principal Financial Officer)
J=AJIjLe_^

_ @e»tii|§ C&^td: o^uy&lsiG / /tezav/k Iffipftaftiftiii Asp^jyg in aim 

### Prunes h\a«~l<* Afaa»AfiaatelGtet 

### o^O-^o^03^A 

### j5*^A&*.lj&.o'l :tf-°°ff°rt^—mEB mJZL

### •^fj_Z>^f_Nn fiMO&O +' U 7C§^&R1MINAL APPEALS

-AbeUeostareieilr 

### Jv_j^^O^C££±loaM<^J&vr epo 7* 7>£^ hknoralofe J2fcfA ?s *r€ Xhj^Ju^Ut=Jh—6£^-



### p^sAlOh^-^ppjtlhiA'L sLot2*> -f-^Le Cou^-^Le^tdktJm^ XL£—^^o^-t^-W-<^--JC£)i\Ui^J^^ _^-'® -f
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 14-784V 

Filed: August 4, 2015 

(Not to be published)

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

KRISTIN LINTZ, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * 

 v. * Stipulation; Attorneys’ Fees & Costs 

 * 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Carol Gallagher, Esq., Carol L. Gallagher, Esquire, LLC, Linwood, NJ for petitioner. 

Debra A. Filteau Begley, Esq., U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for 

respondent. 

DECISION ON ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS1

Gowen, Special Master: 

 In this case under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program,2

 I issued a 

decision adopting the parties’ stipulation on July 28, 2015, and awarded compensation to 

petitioner. On July 30, 2015, the parties filed a Stipulation of Fact concerning attorneys’ 

fees and costs. Additionally, pursuant to General Order #9, petitioner’s counsel asserted 

that petitioner incurred no personal litigation costs in this matter. Id. at para. 3. 

 The parties’ stipulation indicates that respondent does not object to the amended 

                                                            

1 Because this unpublished decision contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to post this 

decision on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act of 2002, 

Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In 

accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to delete medical or other 

information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree 

that the identified material fits within this definition, I will delete such material from public access. 

2

 The applicable statutory provisions defining the program are found at 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-10 et seq. (2012). 
amount of $38,481.68 in attorneys’ fees and cost that petitioner is requesting. 

 I find that this petition was brought in good faith and that there existed a 

reasonable basis for the claim. Therefore, an award for fees and costs is appropriate, 

pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 300aa-15(b) and (e)(1). Further, the proposed amount seems 

reasonable and appropriate. Accordingly, I hereby award: 

 A lump sum of $38,481.68 in the form of a check payable jointly to 

petitioner and petitioner’s counsel of record, Carol L. Gallagher, Esq., 

for petitioner’s attorney fees and costs. 

 The clerk of the court shall enter judgment in accordance herewith.3

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/ Thomas L. Gowen 

 Thomas L. Gowen 

 Special Master 

                                                            

3 Entry of judgment can be expedited by each party’s filing of a notice renouncing the right to seek review. See 

Vaccine Rule 11(a).
**EXHIBIT 99.6**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Performance Sports Group Ltd. (the “Company”) is filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, its annual report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2014 (the “Report”).

 

I, Kevin Davis, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as enacted pursuant to section 906 of the U.S. Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(i) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
| By:                          | /s/ Kevin Davis                                 |   |
|------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         |                                            |   |
| Name:                        | Kevin Davis                                     |   |
|                         |                                            |   |
| Title:                       | President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |   |
|                         |                                            |
| Date:   August 27, 2014 |                                            |

 

1

----
|   | 1.     |   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule 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. |

| Dated: January 28, 2010 | /s/ J. SCOTT WEBBER     |   |
|-------------------------|-------------------------|--------|
|                    | J. Scott Webber         |   |
|                    | Chief Executive Officer |   |
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 15-1934

___________________________

United States of America,

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

Christopher Lindsey,

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant.

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul

____________

 Submitted: November 2, 2015

Filed: November 17, 2015 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before SMITH, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Christopher Lindsey directly appeals after he pled guilty to fraud and identitytheft offenses, and the district court1

 sentenced him within his calculated Guidelines

1

The Honorable Donovan W. Frank, United States District Judge for the District

of Minnesota.
range to 180 months in prison. His counsel has filed a brief under Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), acknowledging that Lindsey’s plea agreement

contained an appeal waiver, and arguing that Lindsey’s sentence is unreasonable. 

Counsel has also moved to withdraw. Lindsey has filed a pro se submission arguing

that the appeal waiver is invalid because the district court advised him about his

appeal rights.

We conclude that the appeal waiver is valid, and after careful de novo review,

see United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702, 704 (8th Cir. 2010), we further conclude that

the appeal waiver is enforceable as to the issue raised by counsel, see United States

v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc); see also Nguyen v. United

States, 114 F.3d 699, 703 (8th Cir. 1997). In addition, an independent review of the

record under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), reveals no nonfrivolous issues

outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and

counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

-2-