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.                  

###### Small Business Administration

                    The Small Business Administration publishes an interest rate called the optional “peg” rate (13 CFR 120.214) on a quarterly basis. This rate is a weighted average cost of money to the government for maturities similar to the average SBA direct loan. This rate may be used as a base rate for guaranteed fluctuating interest rate SBA loans. This rate will be 3.250 (3                    1/4                    ) percent for the October-December quarter of FY 2011.                

                    Pursuant to 13 CFR 120.921(b), the maximum legal interest rate for any third party lender's commercial loan which funds any portion of the cost of a 504 project (                    *see*13 CFR 120.801) shall be 6% over the New York Prime rate or, if that exceeds the maximum interest rate permitted by the constitution or laws of a given State, the maximum interest rate will be the rate permitted by the constitution or laws of the given State.                

Richard C. Blewett,

Acting Director, Office of Financial Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2010-24399 Filed 9-28-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### G., H. & S. A. R’y Co. v. T. G. Jackson.

(No. 3065.)

April 30, 1884.

Appeal from Caldwell County.

Opinion by

Will-son, J.

§ 174. *Certiorari; petition for, must show what.*When a *certiorari*is sought upon the ground that the justice’s court had decided the case unjustly upou the merits, the petition must set forth, substantially, the evidence which was before the justice, and allege that it was *all*the evidence adduced on the trial. And it must also be shown in the petition that the injustice complained of was not caused by the petitioner’s own fault or negligence. In this case, the petition alleged as follows: “Said Jackson introduced himself and two other witnesses, who testified to the value of said stock, which values, petitioner states, were extravagant and unreasonable, and not warranted by the market;'that there was no positive evidence introduced to prove the killing of all of said animals; that the above and foregoing, as stated, is all the evidence adduced on said trial.” There is no statement in the petition of the substance of the testimony of Jackson and the other two witnesses. *Held,*that the petition was insufficient. Mere conclusions and general assertions as to the effect and character of the evidence will not do. The evidence itself, in substance, must be stated, so as to enable the judge to whom the petition is presented, to determine whether or not injustice has been done the petitioner. [W. & W. Con. Rep. §§ 73, 551, *1108,*1251, 1113.] The motion to dismiss the *certiorari,*because of insufficiency of the petition, was properly sustained.

Affirmed.
www.eXFILE.com 888.775-4789  Boston Scientific -- Exhibit 10.7 to Form 8K


    EXHIBIT 10.7

     

    
 

    AMENDMENT

     

    TO

     

    DEFERRED
STOCK UNIT AGREEMENT

     

    A. The
Deferred Stock Unit Agreement (the “Agreement”) dated as of February 28, 2006 by
and between Boston Scientific Corporation (the “Company”) and James R. Tobin
(the “Participant”) governing the award of 250,000 Deferred Stock Units is
hereby amended as follows solely to reflect the requirements of Section 409A of
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended:

     

    1. Section 3
of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the phrase “the Participant’s
termination of employment” in the first sentence thereof and substituting
therefor the phrase “the Participant’s Separation from Service as determined in
accordance with the presumptions set forth in Treasury Regulations Section
1.409A-1(h) (‘Separation from Service’).”

     

    2. Section 8
of the Agreement is hereby amended by deleting the phrase “the Participant’s
termination of employment” in the last sentence thereof and substituting
therefor the phrase “the Participant’s Separation from Service.”

     

    B. Except as
amended herein, the Agreement is confirmed in all other respects.

     

    C. The
effective date of this Amendment is as of January 1, 2009.

     

    Executed
this __________ day of December, 2008 by the parties hereto and, in the case of
the Company, by its duly authorized officer.

     

     

    
      
        	 	BOSTON
      SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION	 
	 	 	 	 
	
                 

              	
                By:
      

              	 	 
	 	 	Title 	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	 	James
      R. Tobin, Participant
**EXHIBIT 21.1**
**SUBSIDIARIES OF WEBMETHODS, INC.**   **NAME** **ORGANIZED IN**   webMethods West, Inc. Delaware   Door Acquisition, Inc. Delaware   The Dante Group, Inc. Delaware   Intelliframe Corporation Pennsylvania   The Mind Electric, Inc. Texas   webMethods Worldwide, Inc. California   webMethods Australia Pty Ltd. Australia   webMethods BV the Netherlands   webMethods Canada Corporation Canada   webMethods Development Center India Private Limited India   webMethods France Sarl France   webMethods Germany GmbH Germany   webMethods Hong Kong Ltd. Hong Kong   webMethods K.K. Japan   webMethods Korea Co., Ltd. South Korea   webMethods Malaysia Sdn Bhd Malaysia   webMethods Singapore Pte Ltd. Singapore   webMethods Software Development (Beijing) Co. Ltd. Peoples Republic of China   webMethods UK Ltd. United Kingdom
Exhibit 99.2

                            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 Annual Report of RTIN Holdings,  Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003,  as filed with the  Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Stanley L.
Swanson, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
         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/ Stanley L. Swanson
-----------------------
Stanley L. Swanson
Chief Executive Officer
May 20, 2003
**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**

 

 

I, David A. Smith, President and Chief Executive Officer of PSS World Medical, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certify that the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ David A. Smith

David A. Smith

President and Chief Executive Officer

 

November 8, 2005
#### Le Gierse & Co. v. N. B. Pierce.

(No. 1535.)

Appeal trom Wise County.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 89. *Custodia legis; rights of a claimant in trial of the right of property; conversion of property released to*claimant, *etc.*Appellee Pierce was the assignee of a stock of goods assigned to him by Chambers & Hawkins. Five writs of attachment issued against the property of *70Chambers & Hawkins, and were levied upon said goods in the possession of Pierce, the assignee. Pierce claimed the goods under the statute for the trial of the right of property, and upon his making affidavit and giving bond as required, the officer who levied the attachments delivered the goods back into his possession. Thereafter, pending the proceedings for the trial of tire right of property, appellants caused an execution in their favor, and against said Chambers & Hawkins, to be levied upon a portion of said goods, alleged to be of the value of $700, and caused the same to be sold, and appropriated the proceeds thereof. Pierce brought this suit to recover damages, both actual and exemplaiy, for the conversion of the goods, and obtained judgment for $270 actual and $200 exemplary damages. *Held,*the goods in the possession of Pierce, when levied upon under the execution of appellants, were *in custodia legis,*and were not subject to said levy. “ If the property be liable to execution, a' levy must always produce a forfeiture of the condition of the bond, for a levy takes the property out of the possession of the claimant, and renders the performance of his bond impossible. Can a result so repugnant to equity and propriéty as this be sustained? Is the law so inconsistent as to authorize the means by which the discharge of a legal obligation is defeated, and at the same time exact a penalty for failure? This would indeed be a reproval to the law and to justice. The maxim of the law is that it injures no man and can never produce injustice.” [Hodges v. Lucas, 10 Peters (U. S.), 400.] No portion of these goods were liable to be taken by appellant’s execution, and Pierce had a right of action against all parties concerned in the seizure and conversion of the same. It was not a sufficient answer to the action that the assignment under which Pierce had claimed the gbods was void. Even if this were so, that did not deprive him of the right to maintain this action.

§ 90. *jExemplary damages; not recoverable in this case.*There is no element of exemplary damages in this case. *71That appellants were actuated by malice, or a disposition to harass or oppress appellee, because he had his execution levied upon the goods which were in appellee’s possession, does not follow by any means. The legal right to seize these goods by execution is a question about which persons learned in the law might differ. The verdict for exemplary damages is not supported by the evidence.

December 14, 1883.

Eeversed and remanded.
EX-10.2






Exhibit 10.2




WAIVER




In consideration for the benefits I will receive as a result of my employer’s participation in the
United States Department of the Treasury’s TARP Capital Purchase Program, I hereby voluntarily
waive any claim against the United States or my employer for any changes to my compensation or
benefits that are required to comply with the regulation issued by the Department of the Treasury
as published in the Federal Register on October 20, 2008.



I acknowledge that this regulation may require modification of the compensation, bonus, incentive
and other benefit plans, arrangements, policies and agreements (including so-called “golden
parachute” agreements) that I have with my employer or in which I participate as they relate to the
period the United States holds any equity or debt securities of my employer acquired through the
TARP Capital Purchase Program.



This waiver includes all claims I may have under the laws of the United States or any state related
to the requirements imposed by the aforementioned regulation, including without limitation a claim
for any compensation or other payments I would otherwise receive, any challenge to the process by
which this regulation was adopted and any tort or constitutional claim about the effect of these
regulations on my employment relationship.



          


Name:


Title:



Dated: December      , 2008
#### STATE ex rel. Ricky Lynn BRUCE v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2010-KH-2747.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 16, 2011.

In re Bruce, Ricky Lynn; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Lafourche, 17th Judicial District Court Div. E, No. 430905; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2010 KW 1760.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; *State ex rel. Glover v. State,*93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; *see also State ex rel. Fleury v. State,*93-2898 (La.10/13/95), 661 So.2d 488.

WEIMER, J., recused.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**Pursuant      to 18 U.S.C. 1350**

**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, 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              Registrant. |

|                                     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |                                   |
|------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                                     |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
| Date: December              6, 2006 | By:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   | /s/ Keith              A. Meister |
|                                     | **Keith              A. Meister**                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|                                     | Principal                Executive Officer and Vice Chairman of the Board ofAmerican                Property Investors, Inc.(Principal                Executive Officer), the General Partner ofAmerican                Real Estate Holdings Limited                Partnership |
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Darrell THOMAS.

No. 2011-KO-0374.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 16, 2011.

In re Thomas, Darrell; — Defendant; Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District Court Div. F, No. 479-328; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 20Ó9-KA-1578.

Denied.
News United States Air Force
 CMSAF, Airmen display resiliency on Mt. FujiPublished July 15, 2015
                        
                        By Tech. Sgt. Christopher Marasky
                        
                        
                        374th Airlift Wing Public Affairs
                **MOUNT FUJI, Japan (AFNS) --**
                Resiliency is a word that every Airman serving today should know, as it's the cornerstone of the Air Force's Comprehensive Airman Fitness.
The CAF is built upon four pillars that help build resilient Airmen: physical, spiritual, mental and social.
Airmen from Yokota Air Base tested many of those pillars as they climbed Japan's tallest mountain on July 11. To reach the summit of Mount Fuji, hikers had to climb over 5,000 feet, starting at the fifth station at an altitude of 7,562 feet, and ending at the summit at an altitude of 12,389 feet. The climb can take anywhere from three to seven hours.
Yokota AB Airmen had a special guest climbing beside them: Chief Master Sgt. of the Air Force James A. Cody.
"Having the chief master sergeant of the Air Force climb alongside us was a great bonus," said Staff Sgt. Kelcey McDonald, a U.S. Air Force Band of the Pacific-Asia audio engineer. "I got a chance to shake hands with him on the journey and talk with him at the top of the mountain."
But the trip up the mountain wasn’t an easy trip, and when challenged, Airmen had to rely upon those pillars of resiliency to accomplish their goal of reaching the summit.
"The challenges I faced were spiritual, mental and physical," McDonald said.  "When I wanted to quit, I had to believe my higher power would help me make it to the top, even as I debated in my mind how much I had left, versus how much I'd already climbed."
Despite the challenges, McDonald was able to reach the summit, a feat which he attributes to his resiliency and the importance of having a wingman.
"Being resilient and having an Airman wingman were critical to my success," McDonald said.  "You have another voice to encourage you and remind you that you are not alone in the journey."
Building that wingmanship is a core aspect of resiliency, according to Cody.
"Team building is building resiliency," Cody said.  "When you learn things about people, get to know them on a more personal level, start to think about them a little bit differently, start to care about them differently, it does go to the resiliency."
That resiliency and wingmanship was important as members climbed to the top of the mountain, according to Cody.
"You draw strength from one another," Cody said.  "People definitely drew strength from each other today."
In the end it was a great experience, heightened by having the chief master sergeant of the Air Force lead the way, McDonald said.
"This is another example of our top Airmen leading the way," McDonald said.  "It was great to have him there at the summit to welcome those who have followed the path and achieved the same outcome."Yokota AB 



Japan 



PACAF 



Mount Fuji 



CMSAF
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000  
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,793
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   63,866
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,097
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,602
<PP&E>                                           2,627
<DEPRECIATION>                                     988
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  83,754
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,374
<BONDS>                                         53,153
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            3,890
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            74
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,263
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    83,754
<SALES>                                         23,371
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,371
<CGS>                                           13,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   13,522
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   605
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,049
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,195
<INCOME-TAX>                                       932
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,263
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,263
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .41
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
32.1

|Certification
ofCentral Coast BancorpPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002Regarding Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the Quarter Ended March 31, 2005



Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Central Coast Bancorp, a California corporation (the
Company), does hereby certify that:


1. The
Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005
(the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2.
Information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|       |  |               
|------ |  | --------------
|Dated: |  | April 28, 2005
|       |  |               
|       |  |               
|      
|Dated: |  | April 28, 2005
|       |  |               
|       |  |               
|       |  |               

|A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Central Coast Bancorp and will be retained by Central Coast Bancorp
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------