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



Exhibit 32.01 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PLATO Learning, Inc.
(the Company) for the period ended April 30, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John
Murray, the Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
hereby certify, pursuant to and for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:  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 results of operations of
the Company. Date: June 14, 2004
    /s/ John MurrayChairman, President andChief Executive Officer
#### John Cartmell *v.*W. H. Kibby et al. J. M. Buckman *v.*W. H. Kibby et al. N. Cartmell *v.*W. H. Kibby et al.

Judicial Sales — Inadequacy of Price — Redemption.

However inadequate may be the price at which a defendant purchased land at an execution sale, he will be entitled to hold the land under the sheriff’s deed, made after the right of redemption expired.

APPEAL FROM UNION CIRCUIT COURT.

December 18, 1868.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Hardin:

The controlling questions presented for the determination of this court on each of these appeals, so far as the appellees, B. G. Kibby, J. W. Kibby and Spalding and Chapman, are concerned, are whether the conveyances from the sheriff to Harth and from him to Spalding and Chapman and from them to B. F. and J. W. Kibby were fraudulent as to the creditors of W.’H. Kibby, or in connection with the deed of trust made on the 8th of April, 1861, operated to vest’the title to the land in B. F. and J. W. Kibby as trustees, subject to W. H. Kibby’s debts.

However inadequate may have been the price at which Harth purchased the land, we do not perceive in the record any reason why he might not have held the land, if he had chosen to do so, under the sheriff’s deed to him, which was made after Kibby’s .right of redemption had expired, and which Chapman and Spald*162ing appear to have acted with liberality towards B. F. and J. W. Kibby, which may have been prompted by sympathy for their father in his misfortunes, there is not sufficient evidence of a fraudulent combination between them and the Kibbys to authorize the court to set aside the deeds; nor do we think the provisions of the deed of trust, as the land was sooner redeemed under it, can affect the validity of the title afterwards acquired from Spalding and Chapman, or render the land liable to the claims of W. H. Kibby’s creditors.

Huston, *for appellants.*

*Bush for appellees.*

As to the claim of John Cartmell for the price of a stallion horse ' bought of Mrs. Harrell, we think the conclusion sustained by the evidence that Cartmell was the principal in the debt and retained the ownership of the horse and ought not, therefore, to have recovered on his claim for the price paid by him.

Wherefore, perceiving no error in the judgment, the same is *affirmed.*
Document

Exhibit 10.1
SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE 
TRIUMPH BANCORP, INC.
2014 OMNIBUS INCENTIVE PLAN


THIS SECOND AMENDMENT (the “Amendment”) to the Triumph Bancorp, Inc. Omnibus Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), is made effective as of March 16, 2021 (the “Amendment Effective Date”), by Triumph Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”), subject to approval by the Company’s stockholders. 
W I T N E S S E T H: 
WHEREAS, Section 11(c) of the Plan provides that the Compensation Committee of the Company’s board of directors (the “Committee”) may amend the Plan, subject to the approval of the Company’s stockholders if such approval is required by the listing standards of the NASDAQ; 
WHEREAS, the Committee has determined that it is in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders to amend the Plan in order to, among other things, increase the total number of shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per share, of the Company (“Shares”) reserved for delivery with respect to awards under the Plan in order to ensure that sufficient shares of Common Stock are available for future awards and to extend the term of the Plan; and 
WHEREAS, the Committee now desires to amend the Plan in the manner contemplated hereby, subject to approval by the Company’s stockholders at the Company’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. 
NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan shall be amended as of the Amendment Effective Date, subject to approval by the Company’s stockholders, as set forth below: 
  
									
	 	1.	The first two sentences of Clause (a) of Section 3 of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:


  
									
	 	(a)	Plan Maximums. The maximum number of Shares that may be granted pursuant to Awards under this Plan shall be 2,450,000 Shares. Subject to the provisions of Section 3(c) (relating to adjustments upon changes in capital structure and other corporate transactions), the maximum number of Shares that may be granted pursuant to Stock Options intended to be Incentive Stock Options shall be 2,450,000 Shares. 



  
									
	 	2.	Clause (d) of Section 6 of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:


  
									
	 	(d)	Rights of a Shareholder. Except as provided in this Section 6 and the applicable Award Agreement, the applicable Participant shall have, with respect to the Shares of Restricted Stock, all of the rights of a shareholder of the Company holding the class or series of Shares of Restricted Stock, including, if applicable, the right to vote the Shares and the right to receive any dividends; provided however, any dividends or dividend equivalents on Shares of Restricted Stock shall subject to the same time and/or performance-based vesting conditions applicable to the underlying Award and paid, if vested, at the same time as the underlying Award. 



  
									
	 	3.	Clause (b) of Section 11 of the Plan is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:










  
									
	 	(b)	Termination. The Plan will terminate on March 16, 2031. Awards outstanding as of such date shall not be affected or impaired by the termination of this Plan.”
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4776 Introduced in House (IH)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 4776

  To make it a Federal crime to use a weapon of a State or local law 
 enforcement officer in the commission of a crime against the officer.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 9, 1998

 Mrs. Myrick introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To make it a Federal crime to use a weapon of a State or local law 
 enforcement officer in the commission of a crime against the officer.

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

SECTION 1. COMMISSION OF CRIME AGAINST STATE OR LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT 
              OFFICER USING OFFICER'S WEAPON MADE A FEDERAL CRIME.

    (a) In General.--Title 18, United States Code, is amended by 
inserting after chapter 93 the following:

  ``CHAPTER 94--PROTECTION OF STATE AND LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS

``Sec.
``1941. Protection of State and local law enforcement officers.
``Sec. 1941. Protection of State and local law enforcement officers
    ``Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce outside 
the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, 
unlawfully obtains a weapon from an individual who is a State or local 
law enforcement officer and, knowing or having reasonable cause to 
believe that the individual is a State or local law enforcement 
officer, knowingly or recklessly uses or attempts to use the weapon to 
engage in conduct that is a criminal offense against the individual 
under the law of the State, Territory, Possession, or District in which 
the conduct occurs, shall be punished in the same manner in which the 
person would be punished if the conduct occurred within the special 
maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of chapters for such title is 
amended by inserting after the item relating to chapter 93 the 
following:

``94. Protection of State and local law enforcement officers    1941''.
                                 <all>
```
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Kelly Freeman, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, et al., 

Defendants. 

NO. CV-15-01772-PHX-ROS

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE 

 Decision by Court. This action came for consideration before the Court. The 

issues have been considered and a decision has been rendered. 

IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that, pursuant to the Court’s Order filed 

March 23, 2017, which granted the Motion for Summary Judgment, judgment is entered 

in favor of Defendant Express Recovery Systems and against Plaintiff. Plaintiff to take 

nothing, and the complaint and action are dismissed with prejudice.

 Brian D. Karth

 District Court Executive/Clerk of Court

March 23, 2017 

s/ Kenneth G. Miller

 By Deputy Clerk

 

Case 2:15-cv-01772-ROS Document 76 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 1
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 23

- 00350

- CV

DEE SIREK

, Appellant

v.

SOUTHWESTERN CORRECTIONAL, LLC

D/B/A LASALLE CORRECTIONS, LLC

, Appellee s

From the 18th District Court

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court No. DC

- C202100256

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Dee Sirek, filed a notice of appeal in this Court on November 6, 2023.

On December 5, 2023, and again on January 8, 2023, we received not ice from the Johnson

C ounty Clerk's Office sta tin g that the Clerk has not received payment for t he clerk's

record

.

On February 13, 2024, we notified Appellant that, if he desires to proceed with th is

appeal, he must pay or make arrangements to pay t he clerk's fee and notify this Court ofSirek v. Southwestern Correctional, LLC d/b/a LaSalle Corrections, LLC Page 2

the actions taken wi thin twenty

- one days after the date of the l e tter. We warned that the

failure to do so could result in dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution . More than

twenty

- one days have pas sed sinc e our February 13, 2024 letter, and we have not received

any response from Appellant regarding the Clerk's Record.

If an appellant fails to pay or make arrangements to pay the clerk's fee for

preparati on of the record, this Court may dismiss the appeal fo r want of prosecution

unless the appellant was entitled to proceed without payment of costs. See T EX

. R. A PP

.

P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b), (c). To date, the record does not reflect that Appellant has p aid or

arrange d to pay for the Clerk's Record or that Appella nt is ent itled to proceed without

payment of costs.

Th erefor e, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution

.

STEVE SMITH

Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Johnson, an d

Justice Smith

Appeal dismissed

Opinion issued an d filed M arch 21, 2024

[CV06]
#### Charles A. TROBAUGH, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Suzanne HASTINGS, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 04-3061.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted Nov. 12, 2004.*

Decided Jan. 14, 2005.

Charles Trobaugh, Cedar Rapids, MI, for Petitioner-Appellant.

Bradley W. Murphy, Peoria, IL, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before COFFEY, ROVNER, and SYKES, Circuit Judges.

*

 After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

ORDER

While incarcerated in a federal prison, Charles Trobaugh petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus under 28 U.S.C. § 2241, arguing that the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) miscalculated his good-time credit under 18 U.S.C. § 3624(b). Trobaugh based his petition on a recent district court decision, *White v. Sábana,*314 F.Supp.2d 834 (W-D.Wis.2004). In that case the district court granted habeas corpus relief on the ground that the BOP had miscalculated the petitioner’s good-time credit under § 3624(b); according to the court, § 3624(b) unambiguously directs the BOP to calculate good-time credit based on the term of imprisonment imposed, not the actual time served. The court thus ordered the petitioner’s good-time credit re*715calculated and applied to his prison term, and Trobaugh sought the same relief. The district court in this case, however, denied Trobaugh’s petition.

Trobaugh timely appealed, but after filing his appeal he fully discharged his sentence and was released from custody. Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over this appeal because there no longer exists a live case or controversy. *See AM. v. Butler,*360 F.3d 787, 790 (7th Cir.2004). Here Trobaugh’s completed sentence renders his claim about good-time credit moot; the amount of time he spent in prison cannot now be undone. *See Spencer v. Kemna,*523 U.S. 1, 8, 118 S.Ct. 978, 140 L.Ed.2d 43 (1998).

DISMISSED.
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

 

Scott E. Davis 

State Bar No. 016160 

SCOTT E. DAVIS, P.C. 

8360 E. Raintree Drive, Suite 140 

Scottsdale, AZ 85260 

Telephone: (602) 482-4300 

Facsimile: (602) 569-9720 

email: davis@scottdavispc.com 

Scott M. Harris 

State Bar No. 011524 

Scott M. Harris, P.C. 

8360 E. Raintree Drive, Suite 140 

Scottsdale, AZ 85260 

Telephone: (602) 252-7400 

Facsimile: (602) 795-5610 

email: harris@smharrislaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Kimberly Priestley 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Kimberly Priestley, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Federal Express Corporation Short 

Term Disability Plan; Federal Express 

Corporation; Aetna Life Insurance 

Company, 

Defendants. 

 Case No.: 2:15-cv-02290-SRB

NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT AS TO 

ATTORNEY FEE ISSUE RE: 

REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT

Plaintiff Kimberly Priestley (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Federal Express 

Corporation Short Term Disability Plan, Federal Express Corporation and Aetna Life 

Insurance Company (“Defendants”) file this Notice of Settlement to advise the Court they 

Case 2:15-cv-02290-SRB Document 27 Filed 02/12/16 Page 1 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

-2-

have settled the attorney fee issue that arose as a result of Defendants’ removal of the case 

from Superior Court. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 12th day of February 2016, 

 

 SCOTT E. DAVIS, P.C. 

 By: /s/ Scott E. Davis 

Scott E. Davis 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

 

 SCOTT M. HARRIS, P.C. 

 By: /s/ Scott M. Harris 

Scott M. Harris 

Attorney for Plaintiff 

 By: /s/ Karen McManus 

Karen McManus 

Federal Express Corporation 

Legal Dept. – Litigation 

Building B, Third Floor 

3620 Hacks Cross Road 

Memphis, Tennessee 38125 

Attorney for Defendants

Case 2:15-cv-02290-SRB Document 27 Filed 02/12/16 Page 2 of 3
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

-3-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on February 12, 2016, I electronically transmitted the attached 

document to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a 

Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: 

Karen McManus 

Federal Express Corporation 

Legal Dept. – Litigation 

Building B, Third Floor 

3620 Hacks Cross Road 

Memphis, Tennessee 38125 

/s/ Brittany Muchmore-Rhoads 

An employee of Scott E. Davis, P.C. 

Case 2:15-cv-02290-SRB Document 27 Filed 02/12/16 Page 3 of 3
#### Kim SEVIER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Heidi D. Knight, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and Eric M. Payne, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TIME WARNER, INC. and Time Warner Cable, Inc., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 04-2651(L).

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 7, 2005.

Jay Cohen (Stacey A. Shortall, on the brief), Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP, New York, NY, for Appellant.

Brian Murray, Murray, Frank & Sailer LLP, New York, N.Y. (Eric J. Belfi and Gregory B. Linkh, Murray, Frank *&*Sail-er, LLP, New York, NY; Roy A. Katriel, The Katriel Law Firm, Washington, DC; Mark Reinhardt, Reinhardt, Wendorf & Blanchfield, St. Paul, MN, on the brief), for Appellee.

Present: WALKER, Chief Judge, CARDAMONE, and B.D. PARKER, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the case is REMANDED to the district court in order for the parties to pursue a classwide settlement.

Defendants-appellants Time Warner Inc. and Time Warner Cable Inc. initially appealed from the April 23, 2004 order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (John E. Sprizzo, Judge) denying appellants’ motion to compel arbitration. Familiarity with the facts and procedural background is assumed.

Shortly before oral argument, the parties tentatively agreed to a classwide settlement, for which they seek district court approval, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e). Pursuant to the procedure outlined in *United States v. Jacobson,*15 F.3d 19, 22 (2d Cir.1994), we remand this case to the district court so that the parties may seek approval of a classwide settlement. After the district court has ruled on the Rule *4023(e) settlement, either party may restore jurisdiction to this panel within 30 days of that order by letter to the Clerk’s Office seeking review.

Accordingly, the case is REMANDED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Stephen E. Tessier,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04365-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: February 1, 2018 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed name and bar number

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9942 Filed 02/05/18 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                                  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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Penwest
Pharmaceuticals Co. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Jennifer L. Good, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.

      A signed original 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.



Dated: May 15,  2003     /s/  Jennifer L. Good
                         ---------------------
                         Jennifer L. Good
                         Sr. Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23



Consent Independent Auditors



The Board of Directors
MedPlus, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements of MedPlus, Inc. and subsidiaries on Form S-8 (No. 33-
94426) and Form S-3 (No. 333-20547) of our report dated April 14,
2000, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of MedPlus,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of January 31, 2000 and 1999, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders'
equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three year
period ended January 31, 2000, which report appears in the
January 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-KSB of MedPlus, Inc.
and subsidiaries.

/s/ KPMG, LLP


Cincinnati, Ohio
April 14, 2000
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"SOFIA deployment to French Polynesia","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"IYvjUNvMW6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sofia-deployment-french-polynesia\/\">SOFIA deployment to French Polynesia<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/sofia-deployment-french-polynesia\/embed\/#?secret=IYvjUNvMW6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“SOFIA deployment to French Polynesia” — NASA\" data-secret=\"IYvjUNvMW6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/afrc2021-0096-03.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}