alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 The Honorable Joseph F. Bataillon, Chie f Judge, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 04-3436

___________ Lori M. Metzsch, an individual, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the v. * District of Nebraska. * Avaya, Inc., a corporation, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: November 23, 2005 Filed: December 9, 2005

___________ Before BYE, McMILLIAN, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Lori M. Metzsch appeals the district court’s 1 adverse grant of summary judgment in her employment-discrimination action brought under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) , Title VII, and state law. Having carefully reviewed the record, see Sallis v. Univ. of Minn. , 408 F.3d 470, 474 (8th Cir. 2005) (de novo standard of review), we agr ee with the district court that Metzsch failed to produce anything showing that the reason for terminating her--her perceived bad attitude--was a pretext for ag e or gender discrimination, seeCerutti v. BASF-2- Corp. , 349 F.3d 1055, 1062 (7th Cir. 2003) (ADEA was not enacted to immunize older workers from being terminated for legitimate reasons such as bad attitude); Rose-Maston v. NME Hosps., Inc. , 133 F.3d 1104, 1109 (8th Cir. 1998) (Title VII does not prohibit employment decisions base d on, inter alia, pe rsonality conflicts). While instances of disparate treatment can support finding of pretext, seeWheeler v. Aventis Pharm. , 360 F.3d 853, 858 (8th Cir. 2004), Metzsch offered nothing showing that two younger males--hired at the same time as she for the same position that she held--complained about their work a ssignments as Metz sch had done, seeid. (employees are similarly situated when th ey are involved in or are accused of same conduct, and are disciplined differently).
Similarly, we agree with the district court that the conduct Metzsch cited as a basis for her harassment or hostile-work-envi ronment claim was insufficient to create trialworthy issues. See Burkett v. Glickman, 327 F.3d 658, 662 (8th Cir. 2003) (for hostile-work-environment claim to succeed, alleged conduct must be so extreme as to change terms or conditions of employment). The district court also properly rejected Metzsch’s contention that an em ployment contract had been created. See Ambroz v. Cornhusker Square Ltd. , 416 N.W.2d 510, 515 (Neb. 1987) (right to terminate employee at will should be restricted to exceptions created by statute or instances where clear public-policy mandate has been violated). Metzsch’s repeated references on appeal to her unverified complaint are unavailing, because only a verified complaint is the equivalent of an affidavit for purposes of summary judgment. See Ward v. Moore , 414 F.3d 968, 970 (8th Cir. 2005).
Metzsch’s remaining arguments, and her numerous challenges to various other rulings made by the district court, provide no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. We deny as moot her pending motions.

______________________________
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Electronic
Tele-Communications, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended
September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dean W. Danner, Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

         (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/ Dean W. Danner
-------------------
Dean W. Danner
Chief Executive Officer
November 3, 2003


This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
EXHIBIT 10.4

PROMISSORY NOTE 

	
$85,000  

	
June 1, 2014 




 

FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION RECEIVED, First Priority Tax Solutions Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Maker”), promises to pay Holly1 LLC (“Payee”), at such place as Payee may from time to time designate, Eighty Five Thousand ($85,000) Dollars, with interest thereon at the simple interest rate of 4% per year from the date hereof on the unpaid principal amount. Principal shall be paid together with all accrued interest at the time of such payment, on or before June 1, 2016.

 

This Note shall be governed by the following provisions:

 

	 	
1.

	
All payments shall be applied first to interest due any balance shall be applied in reduction of the principal.


	 	
 

	 
	 	
2.

	
Maker may prepay this obligation.


	 	
 

	 
	 	
3.

	
If this Note is not paid when due, whether at maturity or by acceleration, Maker agrees to pay all reasonable costs of collection, including, but not limited to, reasonable attorney’s fees incurred by Payee on account of such collection, whether or not suit is filed hereon.


	 	
 

	 
	 	
4.

	
No delay or omission on the party of Payee in exercising any rights hereunder shall operate as a waiver of such rights or of any other right hereunder.


	 	
 

	 
	 	
5.

	
Time is of the essence of each obligation of the Maker.


	 	
 

	 
	 	
6.

	
This Note has been executed and delivered in the State of Delaware and is to be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Delaware.




 

 

	 	
First Priority Tax Solutions Inc.


	 	 
	 	
By:

	
/s/ Michael Heitz

	
 


	 	 	
Michael Heitz

	
 


	 	 	
Its: President
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 78 (Thursday, May 11, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H4798]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                         GOP BUDGET RESOLUTION

  (Mr. FOGLIETTA asked and was given permission to address the House 
for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
  Mr. FOGLIETTA. Mr. Speaker, is it any surprise how the Republicans 
would reach a balanced budget in 7 years? By breaking our contract with 
senior citizens, with veterans, with the most vulnerable people in our 
society, and with those of us who live in cities.
  I take the floor today to challenge just one aspect of this 
disastrous plan, that which would bankrupt American mass transit. The 
best way that we can empower people and bring them out of poverty and 
welfare is to help them get jobs and to keep those jobs. This requires 
meeting practical needs, job training, child care, health insurance, 
and mass transit. We must help people get to their jobs on safe, 
dependable, and economical public transit.
  Thus I rise to oppose some of the aspects of this mean-spirited 
budget plan and to oppose, as strongly as I can, the end of the Federal 
Government's commitment to mass transportation.

                          ____________________
```
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT JULIANNA AGAR

DI, Plaintiff - Appe lla nt, v. C ITY AND C OUNTY OF SAN FR ANC ISC O, De fe nda

nt - Appe lle e . No. 12-17776 D.C . No. 3:12-c v-03475-R S M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Northe rn Distric t of C a lifornia R ic ha rd Se e borg, Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d July 22, 2014 ** B e fore : GOODW IN, C ANB Y, a nd C ALLAHAN, C irc uit Judge s . Julia nna Aga rdi a ppe a l s pro se from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt dismissing he r a c tion a lle ging fe de ra l ra c ke te e ring a nd c onstitutiona

l viola tions in c onne c tion with de fe nda

nt ’ s im ple m e ntat ion of Proposition N. We have jurisdic tion unde r 28 

# FIL ED JUL 31 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2). Ac c o rdingly , Aga rdi’ s re que s t for ora l argum e nt is de nie d.U.S.C . § 1291. W e re v ie w de n ovo a dism issa l on the ba sis of re s judic ata . Mpoy o v . Litton Ele c tro-Optic a l

Sy s. , 430 F.3d 985, 987 (9th C ir. 2005). W e a ffirm . The distric t c ourt prope rly dism isse d Aga

rdi’ s a c tion a s ba

rre d by the doc trine of re s judic ata

be c a use Aga rdi ra ise d , or c ould ha

v e ra ise d, he r c la im s in a prior sta te c ourt a c tion. Se eMigra v . W arre n C ity Sc h. Dist. Bd. of Educ ., 465 U.S. 75, 81 (1984) (to dete rm ine whe the r a sta te c ourt judgm e nt would ba r an a c tion in fe de ra l c o urt, a

fe de ra l c ourt m

ust a pply the re s judic ata la

wof the sta

te in whic h the j udgm e nt wa s e nte re d ); Fe d’n of Hillside & C any on Ass’ns v . C

ity of Los Ange le s , 24 C a l. R

ptr. 3d 543, 557 (C t. App. 2004) (se tting forth the le ga l sta nda rd for re s judic ata

unde r C a lifornia

la w a nd noting tha

t “ [r] e s judic at a

ba rs the litiga tion not only of issue s tha t we re a c tua lly

litiga te d but a lso issue s tha

t c ould have be e n litiga te d ” ). Aga rdi’ s re que st to show c a

u se and to orde r the fe de ra l gove rnm e nt to a ppe ar in this c a se , file d on Oc tobe r 8, 2013, is den ie d. AFFIRM E D .

1 2 - 1 7 7 7 6 2
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOHN LaFORGE.

April 18, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 99.33
 MATERIAL CHANGE REPORT
Regulation 51-102 Respecting Continuous Disclosure Obligations
Form 51-102F3
 1.
    
    NAME AND ADDRESS OF COMPANY:
 THERATECHNOLOGIES INC.
2310 Alfred-Nobel Boulevard
Montreal, Québec
Canada H4S 2B42.
    
    DATE OF MATERIAL CHANGE:
May 18, 20113.
    
    NEWS RELEASE:
 A news release describing this material change was issued on May 18, 2011 on Marketwire.
A copy of the news release is available on the SEDAR website at www.sedar.com.
 4.
    
    SUMMARY OF MATERIAL CHANGE:
 On May 18, 2011, Theratechnologies Inc. (the Corporation) announced that it is applying
to list its common shares on the NASDAQ market in the United States.
 5.
    
    FULL DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL CHANGE:
 On May 18, 2011, the Corporation announced that it is applying to list its common shares
on the NASDAQ market in the United States.
 6.
    
    RELIANCE ON SUBSECTION 7.1(2) OR (3) OF NATIONAL INSTRUMENT 51-102:
 Not applicable.7.
    
    OMITTED INFORMATION:Not applicable.8.
    
    EXECUTIVE OFFICER:
 For further information, contact Jocelyn Lafond, Vice President, Legal Affairs, and
Corporate Secretary of the Company at (514) 336-4804, ext. 288.
 9.
    
    DATE OF REPORT:
 May 27, 2011
[No. 43467-5-I.

Division One.

April 17, 2000.]

#### Bruce J. Morgan, DPM, *Appellant,*v. Peace Health, Inc., *Respondent.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 97-2-29849-1, Robert S. Lasnik, J., entered September 10, 1998. *Affirmed*by unpublished opinion per Webster, J., concurred in by Becker, A.C.J., and Cox, J. Now published at 101 Wn. App. 750.
Exhibit 4.33





LOAN AGREEMENT AMENDMENT

This amendment (the “Amendment”)is made between _______________ (“Lender”)and Tanzanian Royalty Exploration Corporation, an Alberta corporation
(“Borrower”)(each a “Party”and collectively the “Parties”)pursuant
to a loan agreement between the Borrower and the Lender dated ____________, if and as amended from time to time (the “Loan
Agreement”).For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby confirmed, the Parties
wish to amend the Loan Agreement as follows:

INTERPRETATION

All words and expressions defined in the Loan Agreement have
the same meaning when used herein. Reference to the Loan Agreement includes amendments thereto from time to time, including the
amendments made by this Amendment. Headings are for reference only.

EFFECTIVE DATE

The provisions of the Loan Agreement are amended as set out in
this Amendment effective as of _____________, 201__, notwithstanding the actual date of execution of this Amendment.

AMENDMENTS

Each reference to the repayment or conversion of the Loan, and/or
any interest owing pursuant thereto, in or to common shares of the Borrower at a per share price of USD$____ and USD$____ in the
Loan Agreement is hereby deleted and replaced with the per share price of USD$0.26 in each instance, effective immediately but
not retroactively.

MISCELLANEOUS

This Amendment may be executed by the Parties in separate counterparts,
each of which when so executed and delivered (including by facsimile transmission or as a pdf attachment to an e-mail) shall constitute
an original, but all such counterparts when taken together shall constitute one and the same instrument.

Except as set forth in this Amendment, the Loan Agreement is
unaffected and shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms



|TANZANIAN ROYALTY EXPLORATION      |  | LENDER   
|---------------------------------- |  | ---------
|CORPORATION                        |  |          
|                                   |  |          
|Per: _____________________________ |  |          
|Authorized Signatory               |  | Signature
|                                   |  | Name:
EX-35.2
(logo) CoreLogic

1 Corelogic Drive
Westlake, TX 76262

SERVICER COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATION

This Servicer Compliance Certification is issued pursuant to the Master 3rd
Party Supplier Agreement dated as of November 18, 2005 (together with all
Statements of Work and amendments thereto, the "Agreement"), between Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A. ("Company") and CoreLogic Commercial Real Estate Services, Inc.
("CoreLogic").

I, Vicki Chenault, an authorized officer of CoreLogic, certify to Company and
with the knowledge and intent that it will rely upon this certification, that:

1. The servicing information required to be provided to Company by CoreLogic
under the Agreement has been so provided;

2. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by CoreLogic under
the Agreement and based upon my knowledge and in all material respects
throughout the relevant reporting period CoreLogic has fulfilled its obligations
under the Agreement; and

3. Attached to this Servicer Compliance Certification is a list of all material
failures and the nature and status thereof. [NONE/NO ATTACHMENT]

CORELOGIC COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE SERVICES, INC.

By: /s/ Vicki Chenault
Vicki Chenault
Senior Vice President
February 8, 2012

Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1  SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION  In connection with the annual report of Aristocrat Group Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended July 31, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Robert Federowicz, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 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; and2.The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.  Date: November 16, 2015BY: /s/ Robert FederowiczRobert FederowiczChief Executive Officer, President, Secretary, Treasurer, Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer and Sole Director   A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
News United States Air Force
 Around the Air Force: F-16 In-Flight Software Update, Talisman Sabre 2021, Spark Tank 2022Published Aug. 6, 2021
                        
                        By Airman 1st Class Garrett Hess
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS) --**
                Today’s look Around the Air Force highlights a test to update the F-16’s Electronic Warfare System through an in-flight software update, Talisman Sabre 2021-2 wraps up with Australia and other allies in the Indo-Pacific region and submissions open this month for the Spark Tank 2022 competition. (Hosted by Staff Sgt. Benjamin Cooper)





For previous episodes, click **here** for the Air Force TV page.
Related links:**- F-16 receives in-flight software update during recent flight test****- U.S. Air Force B-52s showcase long reach of American airpower during Talisman Sabre 2021****- Wanted: Innovative ideas for Spark Tank 2022**Featured Video 



AFTV 



ATAF 



Around the Air Force 



Air Force 



AF 



AFwerX 



Spark Tank 



Advance Battle Management System
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Corporate Trust Services**MAC R1204-0109062 Old Annapolis RoadColumbia, MD 21045Tel: 410 884 2000 Fax: 410 715 2380 |
|--------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

Deutsche Mortgage & Asset Receiving Corporation

60 WALL ST

NEW YORK, New York 10005-2836

 

 

RE: Annual Statement of Compliance for DBUBS 2011-LC3 Commercial Mortgage Pass- Through Certificates, Series 2011-LC3

 

Per the Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of August 1, 2011 (the "Agreement"), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Certificate Administrator ("Wells Fargo"), hereby certifies as follows as of and for the year ending December 31, 2015 (the "Reporting Period"):

 

(a) A review of Wells Fargo's activities during the Reporting Period and of its performance under the Agreement has been made under such officer's supervision; and

 

(b) To the best of such officer's knowledge, based on such review, Wells Fargo has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material respects throughout the Reporting Period.

 

 

March 1, 2016

 

 

/s/ Brian Smith

BRIAN SMITH

Vice President

 

 

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markm an Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_________________________________________ Clerk November 20, 2012

p1113 

# Order

November 20, 2012

145555

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 145555

COA: 303275

Jackson CC: 10

- 006279

- FH

FRANK RICHARD WULFF,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 28, 2012

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF AMERICAN BUSINESS FINANCIAL
SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF SEPTEMBER 30, 1997 AND THE THREE
MONTHS THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                          1
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                      3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                            JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                                 SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                                         3,932,032
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 25,638,724
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     268,980
<INVENTORY>                                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                       0
<PP&E>                                                         5,109,749
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 1,532,313
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               124,343,747
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                  0
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                           3,503
<OTHER-SE>                                                    34,007,513
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 124,343,747
<SALES>                                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              11,206,274
<CGS>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                  6,431,221
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                  30,887
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             1,859,801
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                4,775,053
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   1,623,518
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            3,151,535
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   3,151,535
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                        .90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                        .87

</TABLE>
FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Se pt e m be r 17, 2008 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] IN THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O RT H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 08- 11232 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D. C . Do c k e tNo . 0 4 - 0 0 0 0 1 - C R - 7 - HL U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s J O H N P E T T I F O R D , D e f e n d an t- A p p e llan t.

________________________ A pp ea lfr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e M id d le D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 17, 2008) B efo re A N D E R S O N , H U L L an dP R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E RC U R I A M: E l i z abe th R . F r anc i s c o, appoi nt e d c ouns e lf orJ ohn P e tt i f

or d, ha s f

i l e d a2

m ot i on t o w i thdr aw on appe a ls upport e d byabr i e f pr e par e d pur s uantt o A nde r s v. C a l i f orni a , 386 U . S . 738, 87 S . C t . 1396, 18 L . E d. 2d 493 ( 1967) . O uri nde pe nde nt r e vi e w of

the e nt i r e r e c or d r e ve a l s tha tc ouns e l ’ s a s s e s s m e ntof the r e l a t i ve m e r i tof th e ap p e a l is c o rr e c t. B e c au s e in d e p e n d e n t e x am in a tio n o f th e e n tir e r e c o r dr e v e a ls n o i ssu es o f arg u ab l e m eri t , co u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th draw i s G R A N TED and P ett i ford’ s c on vi ct i on and sent ence ar e A FFI R M ED .