alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 99



      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Robert L. Demorest, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, the Annual
Report of MOCON, Inc. on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2002
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of MOCON, Inc. A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to MOCON, Inc. and will be retained by MOCON,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.



                                       By: /s/ Robert L. Demorest
                                          ---------------------------------
                                       Name:  Robert L. Demorest
                                       Title: Chief Executive Officer


I, Dane D. Anderson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of MOCON, Inc. on Form 10-K for the annual period ended December 31, 2002
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form 10-K fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of MOCON, Inc. A signed original of this written statement required
by Section 906 has been provided to MOCON, Inc. and will be retained by MOCON,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.


                                       By: /s/ Dane D. Anderson
                                          ---------------------------------
                                       Name:  Dane D. Anderson
                                       Title: Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-6117

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

DAVON PERRY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. 

Stephanie A. Gallagher, District Judge. (1:08-cr-00165-SAG-1)

Submitted: July 20, 2021 Decided: July 23, 2021

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Davon Perry, Appellant Pro Se. Annie Meredith McGuire, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Davon Perry appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for compassionate 

release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A), as amended by the First Step Act of 2018, 

Pub. L. No. 115-391, 132 Stat. 5194. We review the district court’s order for abuse of 

discretion. See United States v. Kibble, 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir. 2021). “A district 

court abuses its discretion when it acts arbitrarily or irrationally, fails to consider judicially 

recognized factors constraining its exercise of discretion, relies on erroneous factual or 

legal premises, or commits an error of law.” United States v. Dillard, 891 F.3d 151, 158 

(4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the record confirms that 

the district court properly considered the circumstances presented by the pandemic, Perry’s 

health conditions, and the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors, before denying Perry’s motion. 

Therefore, we affirm the district court’s order. We deny Perry’s motion to appoint counsel. 

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.

AFFIRMED
Order entered August 2 0 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 19 - 00866 - CV MICHAEL WIERSCHEM, M .D., Appellant

V. WILLIAM BOURGEOIS AN D CAROLYN BOURGEOIS, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429 - 02281 - 2018



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant’s August 19, 2019 unopposed motion for an extension of time to file his brief on the merits. We GRANT the mo tion and extend the time to September 3, 2019

. /s/ KEN MOLBERG JUSTICE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY OF 

PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

GIDEON BRADSHAW,

Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 199 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the 

Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 19th day of November, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED, and the Application to file an amicus curiae brief in support for the petition for 

allowance of appeal is also DENIED.
II 

Calendar No. 501

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4227

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 6, 2004

Received; read the first time 

MAY 7, 2004

Read the second time and placed on the calendar 

AN ACT

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

to 2005 the alternative minimum tax relief available in 

2003 and 2004 and to index such relief for inflation.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 4227 PCS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited at the ‘‘Middle-Class Alter3 native Minimum Tax Relief Act of 2004’’. 

4 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF ALTERNATIVE MINIMUM TAX RE5 LIEF TO 2005. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraphs (A) and (B) of 

7 section 55(d)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 are 

8 each amended by striking ‘‘and 2004’’ and inserting ‘‘, 

9 2004, and 2005’’. 

10 (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Subsection (d) of 

11 section 55 of such Code is amended by inserting after 

12 paragraph (3) the following new paragraph: 

13 ‘‘(4) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—

14 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—In the case of any 

15 taxable year beginning in calendar year 2005, 

16 the $58,000 amount contained in paragraph 

17 (1)(A) and the $40,250 amount contained in 

18 paragraph (1)(B) shall each be increased by an 

19 amount equal to—

20 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

21 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de22 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal23 endar year in which the taxable year be24 gins, determined by substituting ‘2003’ for 

25 ‘1992’ in subparagraph (B) thereof. 
3

HR 4227 PCS 

1 ‘‘(B) ROUNDING.—Any increase deter2 mined under subparagraph (A) which is not a 

3 multiple of $50 shall be rounded to the next 

4 lowest multiple of $50.’’. 

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

6 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

7 December 31, 2004.

Passed the House of Representatives May 5, 2004. 

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL, 

Clerk. 
Calendar No. 501

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4227

AN ACT

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to 

relief for inflation. lief available in 2003 and 2004 and to index such extend to 2005 the alternative minimum tax reMAY 7, 2004

Read the second time and placed on the calendar
EXHIBIT 23



               Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Michigan Financial Corporation of our report dated January 19, 1996, included
in the 1997 Annual Report to Shareholders of Michigan Financial Corporation.

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 No. 33-86882 pertaining to the Michigan Financial Corporation Employee
Savings and Stock Ownership Plan and No. 033-59425 pertaining to the Michigan
Financial Corporation Stock Option Plan of our report dated January 19, 1996,
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Michigan Financial
Corporation, member banks, and insurance subsidiary incorporated by reference in
the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.


                                             Ernst & Young LLP

Milwaukee, Wisconsin
March 20, 1998
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

132109 & (28) Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 132109 

 COA: 268012 

CORTEZ CUNNINGHAM,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Wayne CC: 95-007486 

_________________________________________/ 

By order of March 30, 2007, the prosecuting attorney was directed to answer the 

application for leave to appeal the August 2, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals. On 

order of the Court, the answer having been received, the application for leave to appeal is 

again considered. The prosecution has affirmatively stated its lack of objection to the 

defendant receiving 24 days of jail credit in this case. Accordingly, pursuant to MCR 

7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Wayne 

Circuit Court with directions to amend the judgment of sentence to reflect 24 days of 

credit for time served. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because the 

defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 

6.508(D). 

d0618 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 26, 2007 

 Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN SUCH
REPORT.
</LEGEND>


<S>                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>         6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>     DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>          JUN-30-1999

<CASH>                            9,299
<SECURITIES>                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                    12,404
<ALLOWANCES>                       0
<INVENTORY>                      21,085
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 44,343
<PP&E>                          346,068
<DEPRECIATION>                   44,701
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  387,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           107,772
<BONDS>                         170,108
<COMMON>                              1
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>              0
<PREFERRED>                        0
<OTHER-SE>                     (181,445)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    389,685
<SALES>                          34,380
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 34,987
<CGS>                            28,673
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    35,685
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    595
<LOSS-PROVISION>                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               13,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (14,842)
<INCOME-TAX>                      5,943
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (8,899)
<DISCONTINUED>                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                  11,243
<CHANGES>                          0
<NET-INCOME>                      2,344
<EPS-BASIC>                       2.3
<EPS-DILUTED>                       2.3



</TABLE>
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1436 

To provide additional funding for scholarships for students at 1890 

institutions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 8, 2023 

Mr. DAVID SCOTT of Georgia (for himself, Ms. ADAMS, Ms. SEWELL, Ms. 

CROCKETT, Ms. BROWN, Mr. JACKSON of Illinois, Mrs. HAYES, and Mr. 

MCGOVERN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To provide additional funding for scholarships for students 

at 1890 institutions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SCHOLARSHIPS 

4 FOR STUDENTS AT 1890 INSTITUTIONS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1446(b) of the National 

6 Agricultural Research, Extension, and Teaching Policy 

7 Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3222a(b)) is amended— 

8 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (2) and (3) as 

9 paragraphs (3) and (4), respectively; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1436 IH

1 (2) by inserting after paragraph (1) the fol2 lowing: 

3 ‘‘(2) CONTINUING MANDATORY FUNDING.—Of 

4 the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation, the 

5 Secretary shall make available to carry out this sec6 tion $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2025 and each fiscal 

7 year thereafter, to remain available until expended.’’; 

8 and 

9 (3) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated), by 

10 striking ‘‘each of fiscal years 2020 through 2023’’ 

11 and inserting ‘‘fiscal year 2020 and each fiscal year 

12 thereafter’’. 

13 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 1446 of 

14 the National Agricultural Research, Extension, and 

15 Teaching Policy Act of 1977 (7 U.S.C. 3222a) is amend16 ed— 

17 (1) in subsection (a)(3), by striking ‘‘subsection 

18 (b)(1)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraphs (1) and (2) of 

19 subsection (b)’’; and 

20 (2) in paragraph (4) of subsection (b) (as re21 designated by subsection (a)(1)), by striking ‘‘para22 graphs (1) and (2)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraphs (1), 

23 (2), and (3)’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2015 Q1 LivePerson Ex 10.2







March 27, 2015




Dustin Dean






Dear Dustin:


In regards to the Repatriation Letter dated February 25, 2015 and signed March 3, 2015 we are documenting the following amendments.


End of Assignment Bonus


The special one-time only bonus is corrected to be a bonus of $4,000 USD (the “Correction”) paid through the home country payroll subject to U.S. tax withholdings.  This is equivalent to the difference between one and a half month’s base salary and allowances under your Expat Assignment Letter (as extended August 13, 2104) and the base salary outlined your Repatriation Letter. 


Salary Adjustment


As you received a total payment of $40,625 USD on March 13, 2015 (the “Payment”), you agree that the difference between the Payment and the Correction is an amount owing to the Company is a legal debt and obligation and that the amount owed may be partially offset against and deducted from your future wages.


As a result, will begin a salary sacrifice program effective April 1, 2015 and continuing for 12 consecutive months to offset your annualized compensation in repayment of the debt.  The deduction will be equal to $1,526 per pay period for the duration of the 12 month period, unless otherwise agreed upon in writing by you and LivePerson.


Please acknowledge your understanding and acceptance of this offer letter by signing below and returning to Lynn Gibson.  




Sincerely,
	
			
	/s/ Daryl J. Carlough
	 
	3/30/2015

	Approving Signatory Name – Company Rep.
	 
	Date

	Signature
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	/s/ Dustin Dean
	 
	3/31/2015

	Approving Signatory Name – Dustin Dean
	 
	Date

	Signature
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 



By signing this agreement, you acknowledge that you read, understand, and agree to the terms and conditions.





475 10th Avenue, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10018     www.liveperson.com     t 212.609.4200     f 212.609.4201
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

EARATON ADAMS, et al., ) 

Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) CIVIL ACTION NO 08-0155-KD-N 

vs. ) 

 ) 

AUSTAL, USA, L.LC., ) 

Defendant. ) 

 ORDER 

This matter is before the Court on a review of the parties’ Objections to Trial Exhibits. 

(Docs. 445 and 453-2). The parties’ objections, as presently framed, are rote boilerplate statements, 

repetitive “cut and paste,” multiple choice, or otherwise generally unhelpful to the Court. As such, 

the parties shall file new Objections which are substantive in nature and which are actually tailored 

to each exhibit (i.e., which will provide the Court with a preview of the real issue for each exhibit 

rather than repetitive (and conclusory) reference to the Federal Rules). See, e.g., Doc. 306, Civil 

Action 10-00072-KD-N, Crouch, et al., v. Teledyne Continental Motors, Inc. (S.D. Ala. June 24, 

2011). These new Objections shall consist of a short one (1) paragraph explanation for each 

objection. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Docs. 445 and 453-2 are hereby STRICKEN. It is 

further ORDERED that the parties shall, on or before Wednesday, September 21, 2011 at 12:00 

p.m. (noon), file new Objections to the Trial Exhibits in the manner referenced supra. 

DONE and ORDERED this the 16th day of September 2011.

/s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:08-cv-00155-KD-N Document 469 Filed 09/16/11 Page 1 of 1
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 Imagenetix, Inc. (the
"Company") for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lowell W.
Giffhorn, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





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




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




Dated:
      November 15, 2010
            /s/LOWELL W. GIFFHORNLowell
      W. GiffhornChief
      Financial Officer
<PAGE>


                                                                      EXHIBIT 99

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

To the Shareowners of Monsanto Company:

We have audited the accompanying statement of consolidated financial position of
Monsanto Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the
related statements of consolidated income, cash flows, shareowners' equity and
comprehensive income (loss) for each of the two years in the period ended
December 31, 2001 (not presented separately herein). These financial statements
are the responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted
in the United States of America. Those standards require that we plan and
perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of Monsanto Company and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the results of their operations and their
cash flows for each of the two years in the period ended December 31, 2001, in
conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.

As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, in 2000
Monsanto Company changed its method of recognizing revenue to conform to the
Securities and Exchange Commission's Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 101, Revenue
Recognition in Financial Statements.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche  LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
February 5, 2002
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 Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2005 (the Report) of Ruby Tuesday,
Inc. (the Company), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof, I, Marguerite N. Duffy, Senior Vice President and 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, as amended; 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:August 2, 2005 | /s/ Marguerite N. Duffy                                            
|                    | Marguerite N. DuffySenior Vice President andChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.2
          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.
 
 *
    
    The statements of cash receipts and disbursements reflect only cash transactions and do not
include transactions that would be recorded in financial statements presented on the accrual basis
of accounting. The Trust is required to distribute all funds received after payment of expenses.
Accordingly, the Trust has not prepared any statements of financial condition or cash flows. Date: March 29 , 2010
    
    S/S Frank Godino
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 18, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20085 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus VELIA NAJERA RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-482-7

-------------------- Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Velia Najera Ramirez appeals the sentence imposed following her guilty-plea conviction of illegal use of a communication facility, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b). Najera Ramirez’s sole issue on appeal is that the district court erred by ordering her to cooperate in the collection of a DNA sample as a condition of supervised release. This claim is not ripe for review on direct appeal. See United States v. Carmichael , 343 F.3d 756, 761-62 (5th Cir. 2003). Najera Ramirez concedes that this issue is foreclosed.No. 06-20085 -2-
APPEAL DISMISSED.