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



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Argo-Tech Corporation;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;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;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing
and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent function):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
  By:
    
    /s/
    
    Michael S. LipscombMichael S. Lipscomb
Chairman, President and CEO
 
 17
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-15-00218-CR

EX PARTE MARCUS PILKINGTON

From the 54th District Court

McLennan County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015-2154-2

ORDER

Appellant’s motion for rehearing is dismissed as moot because, as confirmed in a 

letter from his counsel of record, Appellant has been indicted, which establishes probable 

cause as a matter of law and thus renders moot his habeas proceeding. See Ex parte Welch,

729 S.W.2d 306, 309 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1987, no pet.) (citing Ex parte Plumb, 595 S.W.2d 

544, 545 (Tex. Crim. App. [Panel Op.] 1980) (“The return of an indictment establishes 

probable cause as a matter of law.”)).

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

(Chief Justice Gray concurs without opinion)

Order issued and filed December 23, 2015

Do not publish
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2876 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to eliminate reductions 

in payments to hospitals for the indirect costs of medical education. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 30, 2004 

Mrs. HUTCHISON (for herself, Mr. BAYH, and Mr. KENNEDY) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to eliminate 

reductions in payments to hospitals for the indirect costs 

of medical education. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘American Hospital 

5 Preservation Act of 2004’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REVISION OF THE INDIRECT MEDICAL EDUCATION 

7 (IME) ADJUSTMENT PERCENTAGE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1886(d)(5)(B)(ii) of the 

9 Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww(d)(5)(B)(ii)), as 

10 amended by section 502(a) of the Medicare Prescription 
2 

•S 2876 IS 

1 Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (Pub2 lic Law 108–173; 117 Stat. 2290), is amended— 

3 (1) in subclause (VII), by adding ‘‘and’’ after 

4 the semicolon at the end; 

5 (2) in subclause (VIII)— 

6 (A) by striking ‘‘and before October 1, 

7 2004,’’; and 

8 (B) by striking the semicolon at the end 

9 and inserting a period; and 

10 (3) by striking subclauses (IX), (X), (XI), and 

11 (XII). 

12 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT RELATING TO DE13 TERMINATION OF STANDARDIZED AMOUNT.—Section 

14 1886(d)(2)(C)(i) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

15 1395ww(d)(2)(C)(i)), as amended by section 502(b) of the 

16 Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Mod17 ernization Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–173; 117 Stat. 

18 2290), is amended by striking ‘‘, or the Medicare Prescrip19 tion Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003’’ 

20 and inserting ‘‘, the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improve21 ment, and Modernization Act of 2003, or the American 

22 Hospital Preservation Act of 2004’’. 
3 

•S 2876 IS 

1 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

2 this section shall apply to discharges occurring on or after 

3 April 1, 2004. 

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.41

December 12, 2001

Bruce Byrnes
3 Deerfoot Lane
New City, NY  10956

         Re: Retention Bonus

Dear Bruce:

         As I discussed with you on December 10, 2001, PXRE Reinsurance Company
(the "Company") has agreed to pay the following retention bonus (the "Rentention
Bonus") to you:

                  Bonus Amount                       Bonus Payment Date
                  ------------                       -------------------
                  $82,500                            January 31, 2002
                  $82,500                            January 31, 2003


         As a condition to the payment of each portion of the Bonus Amount, you
must be in the continuous employ of the Company or its affiliates between now
and each Bonus Payment Date in order to receive the Bonus Amount payable on such
date.

         The Company and any affiliate reserves the right to terminate your
employment with the Company or any affiliate at any time for any reason and no
contract or right to continued employment shall be implied by this letter
agreement.

         This letter agreement: (a) shall be in binding upon and inure to the
benefit of any successor of the Company; (b) shall be governed by the laws of
the State of New York and any applicable laws of the United States; and (c) may
not be amended except in writing.



<PAGE>




         To confirm your acceptance of the foregoing, please sign and return one
copy of this letter agreement to Linda Clauser.

                              PXRE REINSURANCE COMPANY



                              By /s/ Gerald L. Radke
                                 ---------------------------------
                                 Gerald L. Radke
                                 Chairman, President, & Chief
                                 Executive Officer




AGREED: /s/ Bruce Byrnes
        -----------------------------


Date:       12/12/01
     --------------------------------
**Exhibit 31.2**

** **

**Certifications**

** **

I, James J. Kovac, certifythat:

 

I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10-Q of EFC Bancorp, Inc.;

 

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financialreporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)          Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisquarterly report is being prepared;

 

(b)         Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)          Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and

 

----

 

The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

 

(a)          All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrols over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

(b)         Any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
|   | August 12, 2003    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | /s/ James J. Kovac      |   |
|   | James J. Kovac          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Paul M. Walker,

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-17-04411-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 9907 Filed 02/01/18 Page 1 of 1
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Invites Media to Northrop Grumman\u2019s Space Station Launch from Virginia","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"w1wHu2DODn\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-invites-media-to-northrop-grummans-space-station-launch-from-virginia\/\">NASA Invites Media to Northrop Grumman\u2019s Space Station Launch from Virginia<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-invites-media-to-northrop-grummans-space-station-launch-from-virginia\/embed\/#?secret=w1wHu2DODn\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Invites Media to Northrop Grumman\u2019s Space Station Launch from Virginia” — NASA\" data-secret=\"w1wHu2DODn\" 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\/2019\/09\/iss055e071704.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Television to Air Russian Spacewalk at International Space Station","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"CHHTKGmok0\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-television-to-air-russian-spacewalk-at-international-space-station\/\">NASA Television to Air Russian Spacewalk at International Space Station<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-television-to-air-russian-spacewalk-at-international-space-station\/embed\/#?secret=CHHTKGmok0\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Television to Air Russian Spacewalk at International Space Station” — NASA\" data-secret=\"CHHTKGmok0\" 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\/2019\/05\/iss057e131662medium.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":337}
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6393

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. CHRISTOPHER BELL , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Aiken

. Margaret B. Seymour , Senior District Judge. ( 1:08

- cr - 00730

- MBS

- 3; 1:14

- cv - 03925

- MBS )

Submitted : August 23 , 2018 Decided: August 28, 2018

Before DUNCAN and FLOYD , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON , Senior Circuit Judge

.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Christopher Bell, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Christopher Bell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28
U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional c laims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322,
336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedu ral ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at
484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Bell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eric John King, 

Petitioner, 

v.

Charles L. Ryan, et al.,

Respondents. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-98-1277-PHX-RCB

DEATH PENALTY CASE

 ORDER RE: CERTIFICATE OF 

 APPEALABILITY

 

Before the Court is Petitioner’s motion (Dkt. 104) for a certificate of appealability

concerning the denial of his motion for relief pursuant to Rule 60(b).

Rule 22(b) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure provides that when an appeal

is taken by a petitioner, the district judge who rendered the judgment shall either issue a

certificate of appealability or state the reasons why such a certificate should not issue.

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), a certificate of appealability may issue only when the

petitioner “has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” This

showing can be established by demonstrating that “reasonable jurists could debate whether

(or, for that matter, agree that) the petition should have been resolved in a different manner”

or that the issues were “adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.” Slack v.

McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000) (citing Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U.S. 880, 893 & n.4

(1983)). 

The Court finds, for the reasons set forth in its order of July 1, 2009 (Dkt. 102), that

reasonable jurists could not debate its application of Rule 60(b) to Petitioner’s challenges to
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

the Court’s dismissal of Claim 7 on procedural grounds and that the issues involved are not

adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.

Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Petitioner’s motion for a certificate of appealability

(Dkt. 104) is denied.

DATED this 10th day of August, 2009.
#### M’Fadin *v.*Gill, in Error.

A JUDGMENT of a justice of the peace was certified, under the statute of 1823, to the Circuit Court; and, upon a scire facias, there was a judgment awarding execution against the real estate of the defendant: *Held,*that to such a judgment of the Circuit Court a writ of error lies.

Justices of the peace, by a statute of 1823, had a general jurisdiction to the amount of 50 dollars; and they could take judgments by confession for any amount not exceeding 100 dollars, provided the defendant made oath that the judgment was not confessed to defraud creditors: *Held,*that the justice’s record of a judgment confessed, exceeding 50 dollars, must show the oath to have been taken, or he will be considered as having had no jurisdiction (1).

(1)

 The general jurisdiction of justices of the peace, in debt and assumpsit, 'is now extended to 100 dollars. Stat. 1826, p. 30.
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 

Edmundo P. Robaina (No. 018125) 

Thomas T. Griffin (No. 022475) 

ROBAINA & KRESIN PLLC

5343 North 16th Street, Suite 200 

Phoenix, Arizona 85016 

Telephone: (602) 682-6450 

Facsimile: (602) 682-6455 

epr@robainalaw.com 

ttg@robainalaw.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Cleopatria Martinez 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Cleopatria Martinez, 

 Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Maricopa County Community College 

District, et al., 

 Defendants. 

No. CV 15-01759 NVW 

NOTICE OF APPEAL 

 Notice is hereby given that Cleopatria Martinez, Plaintiff in the above captioned 

case, appeals to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit from an order 

entered in this action on November 1, 2017, granting summary judgment for 

Defendants, which was made final by Judgment entered on the same day. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 29th day of November 2017. 

 ROBAINA & KRESIN PLLC

 By /s/ Edmundo P. Robaina 

 Edmundo P. Robaina 

 Thomas T. Griffin 

 Attorneys for Plaintiff Cleopatria Martinez 

Case 2:15-cv-01759-NVW Document 104 Filed 11/29/17 Page 1 of 2
 - 2 - 

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 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on the 29th day of November 2017, I caused the foregoing 

document to be electronically transmitted 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: 

Pavneet Singh Uppal 

Shayna H. Balch 

FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 

3200 North Central Avenue, Suite 805 

Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2425 

puppal@laborlawyers.com 

sbalch@laborlawyers.com 

 Attorneys for Defendants 

By /s/ Gaynell Carpenter 

Case 2:15-cv-01759-NVW Document 104 Filed 11/29/17 Page 2 of 2