alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 3.1B




                      ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                             TO THE
                    ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                               OF
                     ACX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


     Pursuant to Section 7-110-106 of the Colorado Corporate
     Code, ACX Technologies, Inc., a Colorado corporation (the
     "Corporation"), hereby certifies as follows:

     1.   The name of the corporation is ACX Technologies, Inc.

     2.   Article One of the Articles of Incorporation is hereby
          amended to read in
          its entirety as follows:

     "The name of the corporation is Graphic Packaging
     International Corporation."

     3.   This amendment to the Articles of Incorporation was
          adopted by a vote of the shareholders of the
          Corporation on May 9, 2000.  The number of shares voted
          for the amendment was sufficient for approval.

     4.   Except as amended hereby, the provisions of the
          Articles of Incorporation shall remain in full force
          and effect.


     Dated:  May 12, 2000


                                   ACX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


                                   By:_______________________
                                   Jeffrey H. Coors
                                   Chairman and President
NASA Advisory Council Science, Technology, 

Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) 

Engagement Committee 

AGENDA 

May 28, 2019 

12:00 noon – 3:30 pm ET 

VIRTUAL MEETING 

Webex and Call-In Information Below 

12:00 Introduction to Meeting B. Girten 

12:05 Opening Remarks by Chair A. Kennedy 

12:10 CoSTEM/STEM Education Advisory Panel Update M. Kincaid/ A. Kennedy/R. Mellado 

12:25 Office of STEM Engagement (OSTEM) Updates M. Kincaid/K. Brown 

Optimizing Operational Model 

Overview/Budget/ National Space Council/Moon 2024 M. Kincaid 

BSA Closeout/Strategy/Portfolio K. Brown 

Connecting Nation’s STEM To NASA’s Mission 

STEM Partnerships /Apollo 50th Anniversary/Commercial Crew B. Girten/D. DeTroye 

Sparking Interest in STEM R. LaSalvia 

1:25 Discuss/Finalize Findings and Recommendations Members 

3:30 Adjourn Meeting B. Girten 

For audio, please be sure to use the phone number and participant passcode. Use webex to see the slides. 

844–467–6272 or toll access number 720–259–6462, and then the participant passcode: 423307 followed by the # sign. 

WebEx link is https://nasaenterprise.webex.com/nasaenterprise/j.php?MTID=m91ccef56091ef40b117f9289ac69d2cc 

The WebEx meeting number is 907 492 943 and the password is NACstem#28 (case sensitive)
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Action Performance
Companies, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended December 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
R. David Martin, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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(a) 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/ R. David Martin
R. David Martin
Chief Financial Officer
February 12, 2004

21
JOHN ANTHONY LLEWELLYN (PH.D.)

NASA ASTRONAUT (FORMER)

PERSONAL DATA: Born April 22, 1933, in Cardiff, Wales, United Kingdom. 

Married to the former Valerie Mya Davies-Jones of Cardiff, Wales. They have three 

children. His hobbies include scuba diving, swimming, fishing with spear and rod, 

and boating.

EDUCATION: Graduated from Cardiff High School, Cardiff, United Kingdom, in 

1949; received a Bachelor of Science and Doctorate degrees in Chemistry from the 

University College of Cardiff in 1955 and 1958, respective

ORGANIZATIONS: Member of the Radiation Research Society, the American 

Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the International Oceanographic 

Foundation, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, The Royal 

Institute for Chemistry, and Sigma Xi (Research Honorary).

EXPERIENCE: Llewellyn served as a post-doctoral fellow at the National Research Council in Ottawa, Canada, following 

the award of his doctorate in chemistry. In 1960 he went to Florida State University as a research associate in the Chemistry 

Department and was subsequently appointed Assistant Professor. In 1964 he was given a joint appointment as Associate 

Professor in the School of Engineering Science and in the Department of Chemistry.

NASA EXPERIENCE: Dr. Llewellyn was selected as a scientist-astronaut by NASA in August 1967. Having completed 

initial academic training, he and the other members of this sixth group of astronauts are undergoing pilot training in 

preparation for future manned space flights.

Dr. Llewellyn withdrew from the program in September 1968 for personal reasons and presently is the Director of 

Engineering Computing, College of Engineering, University of South Florida.

SEPTEMBER 1968

This is the only version available from NASA. Updates must be sought direct from the above named individual.

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Biographical Data

 Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center

 Houston, Texas 77058
SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

PAUL STEPHEN HARLOW, 

Appellant, 

vs. 

THE STATE OF NEVADA, 

Respondent. 

No. 68300 

ALED 

JUN 1 7 2016 

ORDER OF AFFIRMANCE 

This is a pro se appeal from a district court order denying 

appellant Paul Stephen Harlow's postconviction petition for a writ of 

habeas corpus. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Eric 

Johnson, Judge. 

Harlow pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted sexual 

assault. In his petition, Harlow sought to withdraw his plea on the basis 

that counsel incorrectly advised him that he was eligible for probation, 

which caused him to enter an unknowing plea. See Hill u. Lockhart, 474 

U.S. 52, 58-59 (1985) (observing that, to prove ineffective assistance of 

counsel sufficient to invalidate a judgment of conviction based on a guilty 

plea, a petitioner must demonstrate that his counsel's performance was 

deficient in that it fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and 

resulting prejudice such that there is a reasonable probability that, but for 

counsel's errors, petitioner would not have pleaded guilty and would have 

insisted on going to trial); Kirksey u. State, 112 Nev. 980, 988, 923 P.2d 

1102, 1107 (1996). The district court denied the petition because Harlow 

was eligible for probation and therefore he failed to demonstrate that 

counsel was ineffective. We agree. See NRS 176A.100(1)(a) (listing crimes 

(0) 1947A 
for which probation is not permissible); NRS 176A.110(1) (explaining that 

the court shall not grant probation to a person convicted of attempted 

sexual assault unless he does not represent a high risk to reoffend as 

certified in a psychosexual evaluation report). To the extent Harlow 

contended he was not adequately informed regarding the import of NRS 

176A.110, or that he was promised he would receive probation, his 

contentions are belied by the record and did not warrant relief.' 

Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Gibbons 

cc: Hon. Eric Johnson, District Judge 

Paul Stephen Harlow 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

'We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion 

by declining to appoint counsel. See NRS 34.750(1). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A aea
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2037 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2037

 To transfer administrative jurisdiction of a parcel of real property 
 comprising a portion of the Defense Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio, 
                        and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 28, 2004

  Mr. Voinovich (for himself and Mr. DeWine) introduced the following 
   bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed 
                                Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To transfer administrative jurisdiction of a parcel of real property 
 comprising a portion of the Defense Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio, 
                        and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TRANSFER OF ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION, DEFENSE SUPPLY 
              CENTER, COLUMBUS, OHIO.

    (a) Transfer Required.--As soon as practicable after the date of 
the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Army shall transfer, 
without reimbursement, to the administrative jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs a parcel of real property consisting of 
approximately 20 acres and comprising a portion of the Defense Supply 
Center in Columbus, Ohio.
    (b) Use of the Real Property.--The Secretary of Veterans Affairs 
shall use the real property as the site for the construction of a new 
outpatient clinic for the provision of medical services to veterans.
    (c) Environmental Assessment of Real Property.--
            (1) Assessment.--Prior to the transfer of the real property 
        under subsection (a), the Secretary of the Army shall conduct 
        an environmental assessment of such property to document all 
        reasonably ascertainable information that exists on the 
        environmental condition of such property.
            (2) Costs.--Any costs incurred in conducting the assessment 
        under paragraph (1), including any costs associated with any 
        actions undertaken to bring such property into compliance with 
        any Federal, State, or local environmental laws or regulations, 
        shall be borne by the Secretary of the Army.
    (d) Description of Real Property.--
            (1) Survey required.--The exact acreage and legal 
        description of the real property to be transferred under 
        subsection (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory to 
        the Secretary of the Army.
            (2) Cost.--The cost of the survey carried out under 
        paragraph (1) shall be borne by the Secretary of Veterans 
        Affairs.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. EDWARD R. SMITH.

May 16, 1978.

Petition for certification denied.
No. 10.

#### Watkins Chappell & Co. plaintiffs in error, *vs.*Seaborn A. Smith, defendant in error.

[1.] A misnomer in an appeal, is amendable.

[2.] To make an Attorney at Law incompetent to testify of a fact, the knowledge of the fact must have been acquired by him, *both*during the relationship of client and attorney, and by reason of that relationship.

Complaint, in Randolph Superior Court. Decision by Judge Perkins, October Term, 1854.

Watkins Chappell & Co. obtained a verdict against Seaborn A. Smith. Smith entered an appeal. The clerk, in making out the appeal, misnamed the plaintiffs — writing their names “ *William*Chappell & Co.” Plaintiffs’ Counsel moved to dismiss the appeal on that ground. The Court refused the motion, and allowed the appeal to be amended,although the surety on appeal was dead and unrepresented before the Court. This decision is assigned as error.

Defendant relied on a receipt, in full, from William Taylor, plaintiffs’ Attorney. Plaintiffs proposed to prove by David Kiddoo, one of his attorneys, that subsequent to the death of *69Taylor, defendant told him that “ he was afraid he would have some difficulty about said case, as he had paid Judge Taylor $600, in part, and had no showing for it”. The Court rejected this testimony, on the ground that David Kiddoo was an incompetent witness. This decision is assigned as error.

Tucker & Beall, for plaintiff in error.

A. Hood, for defendant in error.

*By the Court.*

Benning J.,

delivering the opinion.

[1.] The misnomer in the appeal, was amendable by the Act of 1850, to authorize “ amendments to be made *instanter,*in all judicial proceedings, and for other purposes.” The first section of that Act is in the following words: “ That from after the passage of this Act, all misnomers made in writs, petitions, bills or other judicial proceedings, on the civil side of the Court, shall be amended and corrected *instanter,*without working any unnecessary delay to the party having made the same.” *(Cobb’s Dig.*493.)

An appeal is a’“judicial proceeding.”

Indeed the misnomer would be amendable by the Act of 1818. *(Cobb’s Dig.*487.) See a case decided at Macon, in 1854, in which one Seymour was a party.

But although the Court was right in allowing the appeal to be amended, it was not right in rejecting the testimony of Mr. Kiddoo, the Attorney for Watkins Chappell & Co.

It does not appear that the statement of Smith, which it was proposed to prove by Kiddoo, was made to the latter, “ both during the existence, *and hy reason*of the relationship of client and attorney.” Eor aught that appears, the statement was made by reason of something else.

The Act of 1850 is a harsh, almost a penal one. If, therefore, it is doubtful whether a case falls within or without it, a *70proper presumption will make the case fall without it. *(Collins vs.*Johnson, 16 *Ga. R.)*

So the Court should have received Kiddoo’s testimony.
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 on Form 10-K of American Enterprise Life
for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Philip C. Wentzel, as Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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; 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/ Philip C. Wentzel
     --------------------------
Name:    Philip C. Wentzel
Title:   Chief Financial Officer
Date:    March 27, 2003
NASA PLAN - EXCEPTED POSITIONS (September 27, 201

Planned Exceptions Justification: 

Personnel Excepted from Furlough* 

Protection of Life and 

Property* 

F

L

Center Strength 

Full 

Time 

FTE 

Part 

Time 

FTE 

Total 

FTE 

Part Time 

Head 

Count 

On Call 

Head 

Count Total FTE 

Headcount 

(Full & Part 

Time) Tota

ARC 1,211 28 12 40 32 72 40 60 

DFRC 567 5 0 5 1 39 5 6 

GRC 1,664 0 7 7 19 62 7 19 

GSFC 3,397 60 20 80 44 251 80 104 

HQ (including 

NSSC,OIG) 1,484 12 13 25 53 103 23 63 

JSC 3,198 100 44 144 93 358 144 193 

KSC 2,078 4 3 7 6 298 6 9 

LaRC 1,899 7 4 11 11 143 11 18 

MSFC 2,432 34 10 44 34 195 44 68 

SSC 320 2 2 4 8 41 3 9 

Total 18250 252 115 367 301 1562 363 549 

* Rounded for partial FTEs
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 23, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

THE WACKENHUT

CORPORATION, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT

OF LABOR, 

 Respondent.

No. 10-9506

(BRB No. 09-0179 BLA)

ORDER

Before TACHA, LUCERO, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

This is a petition for review in which the employer seeks review of an order

of the Benefits Review Board remanding the matter to the Administrative Law

Judge to reconsider his denial of benefits to the claimant, specifically the

conclusion that the claimant’s job duties did not fit within the definition of being

a miner. We dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

This court may hear appeals from final decisions by the Board. See 33

U.S.C. § 921(c) (“Any person adversely affected or aggrieved by a final order of

the Board may obtain a review of that order in the United States court of appeals

for the circuit in which the injury occurred.”). As a general rule, a remand order

Appellate Case: 10-9506 Document: 01018408133 Date Filed: 04/23/2010 Page: 1
-2-

is not final. See Bender v. Clark, 744 F.2d 1424, 1426-27. Exceptions to the

general rule “must be narrowly construed.” Trout Unlimited v. U.S. Dept. of

Agriculture, 441 F.3d 1214, 1219 (10th Cir. 2006) (internal quotation marks

omitted). 

The petitioner argues that this court should exercise jurisdiction because

“[t]he interests of justice require an immediate review of the Board’s decision

because the present litigation has been subject to inordinate delay.” Petitioner’s

Memorandum Brief on Jurisdictional Issues at p. 4. Mere delay, however, is

insufficient. See Trout Unlimited, 441 F.3d at 1219. The petitioner does not

claim that the delay will result in injustice or additional disputes and litigation.

Id. See also Boughton v. Cotter Corp., 10 F.3d 746. 752 (10th Cir. 1993) (noting

that while the “rules of appealability” may sometimes add time or expense to the

litigation process, they have “the great virtue of forestalling the delay,

harassment, expense, and duplication that could result from multiple or ill-timed

appeals.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).

DISMISSED. 

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Ellen Rich Reiter

Deputy Clerk/Jurisdictional Attorney

Appellate Case: 10-9506 Document: 01018408133 Date Filed: 04/23/2010 Page: 2
|        |
|--------|
|        |
|   |

|    |                                                                                                                        |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10−Q/A of Craft Brew Alliance, Inc. (the “Registrant”); |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; and |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         |
|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 3. | Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
| Date:  | May 10, 2019 |   |
|   |   |   |
| By:    | /s/ Christine N. Perich |   |
|   | Christine N. Perich |   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |   |

|        |
|--------|
|        |
|   |
Dorothy J. Vaughan was the first African-American female supervisor at the National Advisory Committee for 

Aeronautics (NACA). She was born in Kansas City, Missouri, and later lived with her family in Morgantown, West 

Virginia. At age 19, Dorothy earned a bachelor’s degree in mathematics from Wilberforce 

University in Ohio. Dorothy began working as a human “computer” at NACA in 1943. After 

working as a human “computer” and supervisor, she became an expert in digital computers and 

their applications in NASA programs. Dorothy retired from NASA in 1971.

Read more about her at https://www.nasa.gov/content/dorothy-vaughan-biography

National Aeronautics

 and Space Administration

Coloring Page!

2

2

Dorothy Vaughan

Hide & Seek Instructions: Count the number of each 

object you find. Record the number of 

each object in the boxes on the page 2.

www.nasa.gov NP-2020-08-063-LaRC
How many Moons? How many Stars?

How many Earths?

How many Computers?

How many Saturn V Rockets?

How many Report Documents?

How many Astronauts?

How many Adding Machines?

2

National Aeronautics

 and Space Administration Dorothy Vaughan

Hide & Seek Instructions: Count the number of each 

object you found on page 1. Record the 

number of each object in the boxes below.

How many Pens?
How many Moons? How many Stars?

How many Earths?

How many Computers?

How many Saturn V Rockets?

How many Report Documents?

How many Astronauts?

How many Adding Machines?

2

National Aeronautics

 and Space Administration Dorothy Vaughan

Hide & Seek

How many Pens?

3

4

10

1

2 2

4 7

5

ANSWER KEY
STS-129 is the first space shuttle flight for 

Bresnik, Satcher and Wilmore.

The Mission

Space shuttle Atlantis will deliver two Express Logistics Carriers, 

containing two spare gyroscopes, two nitrogen tank assemblies 

and other hardware to the International Space Station. During the 

11-day mission, crew members will perform three spacewalks to 

attach spare parts to the station.

This is the 129th space shuttle flight, the 31st flight to the 

space station and Atlantis’ 31st flight.
Exhibit 10 (bg)

                             ENDORSEMENT NO. 2



  Attaching to  and forming  part of  the  100% QUOTA  SHARE  REINSURANCE
  AGREEMENT by and  among the  Reinsurer specifically  identified on  the
  signature page  of  this  Agreement, ("Reinsurer"),  STATE  AND  COUNTY
  MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, an insurance company organized under the
  laws of the State of Texas ("Company"), VAUGHN GENERAL AGENCY, INC.,  a
  corporation organized under the  laws of the  State of Texas  ("General
  Agent") and  AMEREICAN HALLMARK  GENERAL  AGENCY, INC.,  a  corporation
  organized  under   the   laws  of   the   State  of   Texas   ("Program
  Administrator").

  IT IS AGREED, effective  12:01 A.M., Central Standard  Time on July  1,
  1997 that ARTICLE XXX - PARTICIPATION, the first paragraph will read as
  follows and not as heretofore:

  This Agreement obligates the Reinsurer for 60.00% of the interests  and
  liabilities set forth under this Agreement.

  ALL OTHER TERMS AND CONDITIONS REMAIN UNCHANGED.

  IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  Parties  hereto  by  their  respective  duly
  authorized representatives have executed this Agreement as of the dates
  first above mentioned.



  DATED: June 22, 1998          STATE AND COUNTY MUTUAL FIRE
                                INSURANCE COMPANY


                                By:_______________________________


                                IT'S:____________________________________