alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.45


This Note evidences a loan in the principal amount of Thirty Six Thousand
Seventy Six Dollars and Fifty Four Cents ($36,076.54) made by Daniel E.
Dosoretz, M.D. to Radiation Therapy Services, Inc. on _____________, 1998.

$36,076.54                                                   Fort Myers, Florida

                                 PROMISSORY NOTE

         For value received, RADIATION THERAPY SERVICES, INC., a Florida
corporation ("Debtor"), promises to pay to the order of Daniel E. Dosoretz, M.D.
("Payee"), an individual resident of the state of Florida, at
________________________, Florida, or such address as may be specified from time
to time by the holder hereof, the principal sum of Thirty Six Thousand Seventy
Six Dollars and Fifty Four Cents ($36,076.54). Interest shall accrue at the rate
of eight percent (8%) per annum, compounded monthly.

         Debtor may make prepayments of principal on this Note without penalty.

         Failure of Debtor to make any payment of interest or principal when due
shall be deemed to be an event of default. It shall also be an event of default
if Debtor files a petition seeking relief, or consents to the filing or
instituting of proceedings against him, under any federal or state bankruptcy
law or other similar law, or causes, permits or consents to the appointment of,
or taking possession by, a receiver or similar official of all or substantially
all of Debtor's property. On the occurrence of an event of default, Payee may
declare the entire amount due hereunder immediately due and payable (except that
in the case of an event of default described in the immediately preceding
sentence, the entire amount due hereunder automatically shall become due and
payable), and the interest rate hereunder shall be increased from and after such
default to twelve percent (12%) per annum (but in no event in excess of the
maximum rate permitted by Florida law).

         This Note shall be binding upon Debtor and Debtor's legal
representatives, heirs and assigns. Presentation for payment, notice of
dishonor, protest and notice of protest are hereby waived.

         Debtor agrees to pay and shall pay all documentary stamp tax due on
this Note.

         In the event of any litigation arising under this Note, the
non-prevailing party shall pay the prevailing party's attorneys' fees and costs
incurred in litigation.

         This Note shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida and may
not be changed or terminated orally.

                                        DEBTOR:
                                        RADIATION THERAPY SERVICES, INC.


                                        By: /s/ David M. Koeninger
                                           ---------------------------------
                                            David M. Koeninger
                                            CFO
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 31, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00338

- CV

IN RE Allen Jackie JONES

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

On May 31, 2016

, relator filed a pe tition for writ of mandamus and motion for

emergency stay

. The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the

opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of

mandamus and motion for emergency stay are denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a). The court’s

opinion will issue at a later date.

It is so ORDERED on May 31, 2016

.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 31st day of May, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle , Clerk

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2013

- CI

- 04328, styled In re Marriage of Tetyana Jones and Allen Jackie

Jones , pending in the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Karen H. Poz za presiding.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE,

AS ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned, as Chief Financial Officer of Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. (together, the Company), does hereby certify that to the
undersigneds knowledge:

1) the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 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
Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                                                                  
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: March 31, 2006 |  | /s/ Leigh Ginter                                                 
|                     |  | Leigh Ginter  Chief Financial Officer (Chief
Accounting Officer)

A signed original of this written statement, required by Section 906, has been provided to Norcraft Holdings,
L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and will be retained by Norcraft Holdings, L.P. and Norcraft Companies, L.P. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**Exhibit 23.3**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We herebyconsent to the incorporation by reference in this Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-162298, No. 333-114816 and 333-148156) and Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-137512, 333-141814 and 333-155332), of our reportdated February 12, 2010, of our report dated February 12, 2010, related to the financial statements of Stanley Baker Hill, LLC as of December 31, 2009 and for the year then ended, appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of HillInternational, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 12, 2010, which report expressed an unqualified opinion. 

We also consent to the reference to us under the heading “Experts” in such Prospectus. 

/s/ Schneider Downs & Co., Inc. 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 

March 11, 2011
CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT

Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATIONS

I, KENNETH GALPIN, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Most Home Corp.;

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 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; and

(c) 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 functions):

(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; and

(b) 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.

|Date:  March 23, 2004 | /s/  Kenneth GalpinKenneth Galpin
President and Chief Executive Officer
|--------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11
 
                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              THREE MONTHS
                                                          ENDED JUNE 30, 1998
                                                         ----------------------
                                                         (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS,
                                                           EXCEPT SHARE DATA)
<S>                                                      <C>
Diluted earnings per share:
  Net income available to common shareholders...........       $    3,042
  Average number of shares outstanding..................       11,252,941
  Net effect of dilutive stock options-based on treasury
   stock method.........................................              511
                                                               ----------
    Total average shares................................       11,253,452
                                                               ==========
  Diluted earnings per share............................       $     0.27
</TABLE>
BLD

- 385 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 16

- 1546

___________

IN RE: ALTON D. BROWN,
Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the
United Stat es District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Related to E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2

- 14

- cv

- 05762)

____________________________________

Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. August 18, 2016

Before: KRAUSE, SCIRICA and FUENTES, Circuit Judge s

(Opinion filed : September 12, 2016 )

_________

OPINION *

_________

PER CURIAM

In March 2016, Alton Brown, a Pennsylvania prisoner proceeding pro se , filed a

petition for a writ of mandamus, requesting that we order the District Court to rule on his

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2 motion for reconside ration of the order dismissing his amended complaint without

prejudice and his motion to recuse in Brown v. Wetzel , E.D. Pa. Civ. No. 2:14

- cv

- 05762.

However, the District Court ruled on those motions in February 2016, before Brown

submitted this petition . Apparently as a result of a prison transfer, Brown did not receive

the ruling when it was entered. 1

Because the District Court has ruled on Brown’s motions and he has received the

mandamus relief he requested, his mandamus petition is moot. See, e.g

. , Blanciak v.

Allegheny Ludlum Corp. , 77 F.3d 690, 698

- 99 (3d Cir. 1996). Accordingly, we will

dismiss Brown’s mandamus petition.

1 The District Court recently resent the order to Brown at his current address when it dismissed the action with prejudice.
H. Res. 263

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

Ovtober 9, 1997.

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall

be in order to consider the conference report to accompany

the bill (H.R. 2169) making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and related agencies for the fiscal

year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes. All

points of order against the conference report and against its

consideration are waived. The conference report shall be considered as read.

Attest:

Clerk.
H. Res. 249

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

September 29, 1997.

Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the

House of Representatives:

COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT:

Mr. Smith of Texas, Mr. Hefley, Mr. Goodlatte, and Mr.

Knollenberg.

Attest:

Clerk.
EXHIBIT 13.2


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  The undersigned, Sonya Atwal, Chief Financial Officer of Crosshair Exploration & Mining Corp. (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 annual report on Form 20-F of the Company for the year ended April 30, 201a (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.
  Date:  July 29, 2011
  /s/ Sonya Atwal
  Sonya Atwal
  Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 21.1SUBSIDIARIES OF BIOMED REALTY TRUST, INC. AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2005:   Name Jurisdiction of Formation/ IncorporationBioMed Realty, L.P. MarylandBMR-145 King of Prussia Road GP LLC DelawareBMR-145 King of Prussia Road LP DelawareThe list above excludes consolidated wholly-owned subsidiaries carrying on the same line ofbusiness (the ownership and operation of commercial real estate). The list also excludes othersubsidiaries which, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not constitute asignificant subsidiary as of December 31, 2005. A total of 42 subsidiaries have been excluded,each of which operates in the United States.
No. 85043 

# FILE OCT 06 2022

A.enwN EMECOURT DEPU ERK

11 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

ROBERT FORD, AN INDIVIDUAL, Appellant, vs. R.A.A.M. CORP., Respondent.

ORDERDISMISSINGAPPEAL Appellant filed a notice ofappeal challenging an order denying
a motion to alter or amend the judgment. Eighth Judicial District Court, Clark County; Susan Johnson, Judge.

Because this court has held that such orders are not independently appealable, this court entered an order directing appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See NRAP 3A(b). This court further noted that although a default had been entered against third-party defendant Valley Electric Association, no default judgment has been entered. Appellant has responded and confirms that the appeal is from both the underlying judgment and the denial ofthe tolling motion.

However, the jurisdictional issue remains with respect to the default entered against Valley Electric. Appellant's argument that the entry ofdefault should serve as a final disposition of claims against Valley Electricis unavailing. A default, unlike a defaultjudgment, does not fully resolve any claims. See generally Estate of Lornastro v. Am. Family In.s. Grp., 124 Nev. 1060, 1068, 195 P.3d 339, 345 (2008) (recognizing the distinction between a default and a default judgment). Accordingly, the

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 

# 22-31s-Z3-district court has not entered a final writtenjudgment adjudicating all the

rights and liabilities ofall the parties, and the district court did not certify its order as final pursuant to NRCP 4(b). Lee v. GNLV Corp., 116 Nev. 424, 996 P.2d 416 (2000);KDISylvan Pools v. Workman, 107 Nev. 340, 810 P.2d 1217(1991);Rae v.AllAmerican Life & Cas. Co., 95Nev.920, 605P.2d 196 (1979). Thiscourt lacksjurisdiction, and

ORDERSthis appealDISMISSED.

J. Hardesty 

# ..444G,0 J. Stiglich

Herndon

cc: Hon. Susan Johnson, District Judge Kristine M. Kuzemka, Settlement Judge Law Office ofCorey B. Beck, P.C. Olson, Cannon, Gormley, & Stoberski Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
911) I947A 2
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Abby Graf","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/agraf\/","title":"Space Biology","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"GQt6bTt0sc\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/houston-we-have-a-podcast\/space-biology\/\">Space Biology<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/podcasts\/houston-we-have-a-podcast\/space-biology\/embed\/#?secret=GQt6bTt0sc\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Space Biology” — NASA\" data-secret=\"GQt6bTt0sc\" 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\/12\/space-bio-16x9-1.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

KEVIN WOODROW BLACKERBY, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 23-0265 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR1988-007047

The Honorable Lisa Ann Vandenberg, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Faith C. Klepper

Counsel for Respondent

De La Torre Law Office, PLC, Phoenix

By Daniela De La Torre

Counsel for Petitioner

FILED: 05-16-2024
STATE v. BLACKERBY

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma, Judge Jennifer B. Campbell, and 

Michael J. Brown delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Kevin Woodrow Blackerby seeks review of the 

superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.1. This is Blackerby’s 

seventh petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or legal error, this court will not 

disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. See 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577 ¶ 19 (2012). Petitioner has the burden to 

show that the superior court erred in denying the petition for postconviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538 ¶ 1 (App. 2011).

¶3 This court has reviewed the record in this matter, the order 

denying the petition for post-conviction relief and the petition for review. 

This court finds the petitioner has not established error. 

¶4 This court grants review but denies relief.
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

# AGENCY:

National Science Foundation.

# ACTION:

Notice of permits issued Under the Antarctic Conservation  Act of 1978, Public Law 95-541.

# SUMMARY:

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. This is the required notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Li Ling Hamady, ACA Permit Officer, Division of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230. Or by email:                         *ACApermits@nsf.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On September 30, 2014 the National Science Foundation published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     of a permit application received. The permit was issued on October 31, 2014 to:                

Lockheed Martin Corporation—Permit No. 2015-010

Nadene G. Kennedy,

Polar Coordination Specialist, Division of Polar Programs.

[FR Doc. 2014-26589 Filed 11-7-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P