alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.8


 


SUBSCRIPTION
AGREEMENT


 


	TO:	The Directors of FG New America Acquisition II Corp. (the “Company”).




 


The undersigned hereby subscribes for 6,468,750 shares of common stock
(the “Shares”) of the Company. In consideration for the issue of the Shares, the undersigned hereby agrees and undertakes
to pay $25,000 to the Company.


 


We agree to take the Shares subject to the Certificate of Incorporation
and By-laws of the Company and we authorize you to enter the following name and address in the stockholders ledger of the Company:


 


	Name:	FG New America Investors II LLC




 


	Address:	Attn: Hassan R. Baqar, Manager
	 	105 S. Maple Street
	 	Itasca, IL 60143
	 	Email: hbaqar@sequoiafin.com




 


FG NEW AMERICA INVESTORS II LLC


 


	Signed:	/s/ Hassan R. Baqar	



Name: Hassan R. Baqar


Title: Manager


 


	Dated:	February 3, 2021




 


Accepted:


 


FG NEW AMERICA ACQUISITION II CORP.


 


	Signed:	/s/
                                            Larry G. Swets, Jr.	



Name: Larry G. Swets, Jr.


Title: Chief Executive Officer


 


	Dated:	February 3, 2021
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE COMMITMENT OF M.M.

October 28, 1987.

This appeal having been certified by the Court, 107 *N.J.*118 (1987), upon the petition of the Public Advocate seeking review of the/unreported final judgment of the Appellate Division dated June 3, 1986;

And the Court having reviewed and considered the briefs and oral argument of the parties and the record below;

And the Court now being satisfied that grounds for certification do not exist under *Rule*2:12-4 for the reasons that (1) although the trial court opinion failed to make adequate find*61ings or express legal conclusions, the applicable standards relative to danger to self or others are examplified in cases such as *In re S.L.,*94 *N.J.*128 (1983), and *State v. Krol,*68 *N.J.*236 (1975); (2) a new statute, *L.*1987, *c.*116, effective November 7, 1988, provides standards regarding danger to self to govern such cases in the near future; (3) although M.M. has suffered her commitment, she will suffer no financial consequence; and, therefore (4) no sufficient reasons for certification remain,

It is ORDERED that certification having been improvidently granted, the within appeal is dismissed.
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Advisory Committee for Education and Human Resources (#1119).                    

*Date/Time:*                         November 3, 2010; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. November 4, 2010; 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         National Science Foundation, Room 555, Stafford II Annex, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22203.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         OPEN*.                    

*Visitors please report to the Information Center in NSF's North Lobby to receive your Visitor Badge and directions to the Stafford II Annex building next door to NSF's main building.

*Contact Person:*                         James Colby, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230 (703) 292-5331                         *jcolby@nsf.gov.*

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice with respect to the Foundation's science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education and human resources programming.                    

## Agenda

### November 3, 2010 (Wednesday)

Report from the NSF Acting Assistant Director for Education and Human Resources Strategic Vision  Break-out Groups:

Working Lunch

Break-out Groups Report to Full Committee

Visit with NSF Director and Deputy Director

### November 4, 2010 (Thursday)

Receipt of Committee of Visitor Reports for:

Louis Stokes Alliances for Minority Participation Program

Alliances for Graduate Education and the Professoriate Program

Centers of Research Excellence in Science and Technology Program

Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Undergraduate Program

Tribal Colleges and Universities Program

Joint Meeting with Members of the Mathematical and Physical Sciences Advisory Committee.

Adjournment.

Dated: October 8, 2010.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2010-25823 Filed 10-13-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LUIS MANUEL COELHO,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-72115

Agency No. A030-816-201

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted April 20, 2011** 

Before: RYMER, THOMAS, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

Luis Manuel Coelho, a native and citizen of Portugal, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order rejecting his motion to reopen. 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We grant the petition for review and

remand.

FILED

APR 22 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-72115

The BIA rejected Coelho’s motion to reopen without the benefit of our

decision in Reyes-Torres v. Holder, Nos. 08-74452 & 09-70214, 2011 WL

1312570 (9th Cir. April 7, 2011) (mandate pending), in which we concluded that

8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(d) did not apply to preclude a motion to reopen filed after the

petitioner had been removed. See Reyes-Torres, 2011 WL 1312570, at *2-*3

(citing Coyt v. Holder, 593 F.3d 902 (9th Cir. 2010)). We remand to the BIA in

light of this intervening case law.

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
**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 DrugMax, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-Q for the quarter ended April 1, 2006, as filed with the Securities and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edgardo A. Mercadante,
      President, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board and Principal
      Executive Officer, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:




(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with 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 result of operations of the Company.




*/s/
                Edgardo A. Mercadante*Edgardo
                A. MercadantePresident,
                Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of the Board and Principal Executive
                OfficerMay
                15, 2006
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

No. 95-10789

_______________________

In The Matter Of: DON RAY DIXON; DANA DENE DIXON,

Debtors,

WILLIAM M. RAVKIND,

Appellant,

versus

DALE WOOTTON, Trustee,

Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(3:92-CV-2004-P)

_________________________________________________________________

May 10, 1996

Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The court has considered appellant’s position in light of

the briefs and pertinent portions of the record. Having done so,

we find no reversible error of fact or law and affirm for

essentially the reasons stated by the bankruptcy and district

courts.
AFFIRMED.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A15A2261. ARTHUR L. STEELE v. THE STATE.

A jury found Arthur L. Steele guilty of two counts of burglary, and we affirmed

his conviction in an unpublished opinion. See Steele v. State, Case Number

A09A1941, decided Jan. 13, 2010. In 2015, Steele filed an extraordinary motion for

a new trial, which the trial court denied. Steele seeks to appeal this ruling. 

An order denying an extraordinary motion for a new trial must be appealed by

application for discretionary appeal. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (7); Balkcom v. State,

227 Ga. App. 327, 329 (489 SE2d 129) (1997). Because Steele failed to comply with

the discretionary appeal procedure, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal, which is

hereby DISMISSED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/03/2015

September 03, 2015
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 99-3727

___________ Anthony Keith Lanos, and others in * class action suit that are still awaiting * the right to sue from the EEOC, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern v. * District of Arkansas. * URS Logistics, doing business as * [UNPUBLISHED] Americold Logistics, Inc., * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: November 28, 2000 Filed: December 4, 2000

___________ Before BEAM, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Anthony Keith Lanos appeals the district court's order dismissing under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 37(b)(2)(C) Lanos's employment discrimination action against his former employer, URS Logistics (URS). Lanos failed to provide URS with requested discovery, despite three court orders to do so. Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Lanos's-2-

action. See Boogaerts v. Bank of Bradley , 961 F.2d 765, 768 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam) (standard of review). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
##### 



BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.

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 Amended Quarterly Report of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc.
(the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Alan B. Levan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

|                                                                                             
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|By/s/Alan B. Levan
Name: Alan B. Levan
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date: February 21, 2003

The foregoing certificate is provided solely for purposes of complying with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and for no other purpose
whatsoever. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein or in any
of the Companys previous filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that might incorporate the
Companys future filings, including this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A, in
whole or in part, this Certificate shall not be incorporated by reference into
any such filings.

45
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements in the RightCHOICE Managed Care, Inc. Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          34,061
<SECURITIES>                                   209,795
<RECEIVABLES>                                   90,027
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               389,346
<PP&E>                                         107,843
<DEPRECIATION>                                  53,512
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 528,019
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          306,630
<BONDS>                                         40,337
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           187
<OTHER-SE>                                     165,189
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   528,019
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               222,642
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  212,814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 913
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,370
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,908
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,462
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,462
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

IN RE: CONDEMNATION BY THE

PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE

COMMISSION OF PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE TOWNSHIP OF BRISTOL, BUCKS COUNTY, COMMONWEALTH OF

PENNSYLVANIA FOR THE I

- 95 INTERCHANGE PROJECT (PARCEL ID

NO. 05

- 020

- 048) THE PENNSYLVANIA

TURNPIKE COMMISSION

v.

ORANGE HILL, INC. AND MARTIN/PETRONE, L.P.,

Petitioners :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 419 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 29th day of November, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is DENIED

.
... ... ... ... ... ... ...



## NUMBERS 13

- 1 2

- 00 008

- CR AND 13

- 1 2

- 00 009

- CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

KIMBERLY AUZENNE

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

, Appellee.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the 105th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez

, Benavides, and Perkes

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Kimberly Auzenne , by and through h er attorney, has filed motions to

dismiss h er appeals

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 42.2(a). Without passing on the merits of the

cases, we grant the motions to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure

42.2(a) and dismiss the appeals. Having dismissed the appeals at appellant's request,2

no motions for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandates will issue forthwith.

PER C URIAM

Do not publish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

2nd day of February

, 201 2

.
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS



The
undersigned, as the chief financial officer of Valley Financial Corporation, certify that the Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2003, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Valley Financial Corporation at the dates and for
the periods indicated. The foregoing certification is made solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code and is subject to the knowledge and willfulness qualifications contained in Title 18, Chapter 63, Section
1350(c).



|Dated: August 14, 2003 |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                       | 
|                       |  | /s/ A. WAYNE
LEWIS     
|                       |  | Chief Financial Officer



38
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
    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(a) or 78o(d)), and2)
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods covered by the Report.
 Date:      November 7, 2008
    By:
    /s/ Ronald E. Hermance, Jr.Ronald E. Hermance, Jr.Chairman, President and Chief Executive
OfficerDate:      November 7, 2008
    By:
    /s/ James C. KranzJames C. KranzExecutive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
585 A.2d 355

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. PASCAL DELGADO.

July 17, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-6496

ANDREW FLYTHE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD ANGELONE, Director, Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-00-537) Submitted: May 17, 2001 Decided: May 29, 2001 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Andrew Flythe, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge’s jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (1994). 2 PER CURIAM: Andrew Flythe seeks to appeal the magistrate judge’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2000). * We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Flythe v. Angelone , No. CA00-537 (E.D. Va. Mar. 12, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF NEW JERSEY, INC. v. JACK COLLINS.

November 10, 1987.

Certification to Superior Court, Law Division, granted.
#### SHERRI BASTRESS AND DONNA BASTRESS v. DWAYNE BASTRESS.

December 8, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
#### Charles ARMSTRONG, Appellant, v. State of MISSOURI; Mel Carnahan, Governor; St. Louis County, Missouri; Buzz Westfall, County Executive; St. Louis County Government; City of Vinita Park; Virginia Bira, Mayor of Vinita Park, Missouri; Daniel B. Kramer, Vinita Park, Missouri, Municipal Court Judge; R. Hartz, Vinita Park, Missouri, City Marshall; Richard Aites, Vinita Park, Missouri Police Officer; Unknown Mudd, Vinita Park, Missouri Police Officer; Unknown Vinita Park, Missouri, City Court; Ku Klux Klan, Overland, Missouri; Ku Klux Klan, of the State of Missouri, Appellees.

No. 00-1912.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 22, 2000.

Filed Jan. 5, 2001.

Before McMILLIAN, BOWMAN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

(UNPUBLISHED)

PER CURIAM.

Charles Armstrong appeals the district court’s1 order dismissing without prejudice his pro se civil rights complaint against numerous defendants. After careful review of the record, we conclude that Mr. Armstrong’s complaint was frivolous and failed to state a claim. *See*28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)®, (ii); *Bray v. Alexandria Women’s Health Clinic,*506 U.S. 263, 267-68, 113 S.Ct. 753, 122 L.Ed.2d 34 (1993); *West v. Atkins,*487 U.S. 42, 48, 108 S.Ct. 2250, 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1988); *Martin v. Sargent,*780 F.2d 1334, 1337 (8th Cir. 1985). Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47A(a).

1

. The Honorable E. Richard Webber, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.