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

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT


I,  Photios T.  Paulson,  Chief  Executive  Officer of  Vasomedical,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
          ended  February  28,  2003  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated: April 10, 2003

                                       /s/ Photios T. Paulson
                                       ----------------------------
                                       Photios T. Paulson
                                       Chief Executive Officer




I, Joseph A.  Giacalone,  Chief  Financial  Officer of  Vasomedical,  Inc.  (the
"Company"),  certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

     (1)  the Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the three months
          ended  February  28,  2003  (the  "Report")  fully  complies  with the
          requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act
          of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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


Dated: April 10, 2003

                                       /s/ Joseph A. Giacalone
                                       ----------------------------
                                       Joseph A. Giacalone
                                       Chief Financial Officer
#### H. N. Gage *v.*Joshua Wright.

Compromise and Settlement — Good Faith.

In. the compromise and settlement of a claim for a less amount than is due, the utmost good faith must characterize the transaction and such good faith is not to be inferred in favor of the debtor.

APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT.

June 15, 1874.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

The defense relied on is that appellee accepted the payment of $1,445.20 as a satisfaction in full of appellant’s indebtedness. It is difficult to perceive the consideration, if there was one, for such acceptance. It is not shown that appellant compounded his debts by the payment to each and all of his creditors of 55 cents to the dollar. It does not appear that the páyment was made to appellee before the debt was due, nor at a place different from the place of payment originally agreed on.

The only possible consideration, to be inferred from anything either in the pleadings or the proof, is the fact that ajppellant’s friends were induced to loan him money upon the faith of appellee’s accepting 55 cents to the dollar in payment of his claim. Appellee was not notified that appellant would be compelled to borrow for that purpose; and he had the right to rely upon the statements made by appellant to his creditors at the meeting in New York, that his assets would pay a much larger per cent, of his indebtedness than 55 cents to the dollar.

*735Elliott, *for appellant.*

*Reid &*Cdrey, *for appellee.*

It is neither alleged nor proven that appellee has received his full proportionate share of appellant’s assets, nor that he has received as much as the other creditors.

No case, in which a defense like that relied on in this action, is . set up-; the utmost good faith should characterize the transaction, and such good faith is not to be inferred in favor of the debtor, who seeks to^ evade the payment of the whole of his indebtedness.

We can not adjudge that the finding of the payee of the common pleas court is palpably wrong, or indeed that it is not according to the weight o-f the evidence.

Judgment affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
                          PRIDE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                                   EXHIBIT 27
                             FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE
                           ARTICLE 5 OF REGULATION S-X


     The schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted from the
consolidated  financial  statements for the six months ended May 31, 1998 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such statements.

</LEGEND>

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              nov-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                 dec-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   may-31-1998
<CASH>                                         12,852
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,143,069
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    25,279
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         31,251,417
<DEPRECIATION>                                 5,799,306
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 40,263,209
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          17,755,194
<BONDS>                                        10,402,038
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       3,991
<OTHER-SE>                                     6,268,956
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   40,263,209
<SALES>                                        7,060,761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               7,060,761
<CGS>                                          5,175,381
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  6,381,350
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,101,731
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (228,414)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (228,414)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (413,708)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.11)

        

</TABLE>
##### 



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 of Bay View Capital Corporation
(the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the
Report), I, John Okubo, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, hereby 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; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company for the periods presented therein. Date: May 10, 2005 /s/ John OkuboJohn OkuboExecutive Vice President andChief Financial Officer
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Bay View Capital Corporation and will be retained by Bay View
Capital Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request. 37
Exhibit 10.16 

 

**NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTOR COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENT**

 

Upon appointment or election to the Board of Directors, each non-employee director who is not affiliated with Warburg, Pincus Ventures, L.P. (“Warburg”), ourlargest stockholder, receives options to purchase 20,000 shares of our common stock under the terms of one of our equity incentive plans then in effect with an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our common stock on the date of thegrant. Such options to purchase shares of our common stock vest 20% on the date of grant and 20% on each anniversary of the date of grant. 

 

Each non-employee director who is not affiliated with Warburg selects to receive either (i) annual director fees of $24,000 payable in quarterly installments of $6,000 or(ii) an option to purchase shares of our common stock, granted on or about the date of each annual meeting of stockholders, equivalent to a payment of $24,000 using the Black-Scholes option pricing model as of the date of the grant. Such options areawarded under the terms of one of our equity incentive plans then in effect with an exercise price equal to the fair market value of our common stock on the date of the grant. Such options to purchase shares of our common stock vest 100% on the dateof the grant. 

 

Each non-employee director that is not affiliated with Warburgreceives a meeting fee of $500.00. In addition, each non-employee director who also serves as a committee chairman receives an additional $500.00 for each committee meeting held outside a regular meeting of the Board of Directors. No compensation ispaid for executing a unanimous consent of directors. 

 

Warburg receives oneallocation of each of the aforementioned option grants and one allocation of meeting fees for the ultimate benefit of Warburg. 

 

Non-employee directors are reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incurred to attend Board of Directors and committee meetings.
[Exhibit 32.1]

                         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 of BF Acquisition Group
III, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending
April 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William Colucci,
President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

    (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

Dated: June 16, 2004

                   /s/ William Colucci
                   ----------------------------
                   William Colucci, President
                   BF Acquisition Group III, Inc.
**EXHIBIT      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**Pursuant      to**

**18      U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**As      Adopted pursuant to**

**Section      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

| Date:                June 22, 2006 | By:    | /s/                Craig E. Peeples                                                                                                |
|------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                               |   | Craig                E. Peeples                                                                                                    |
|                               |   | Interim                Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Controller(Principal                Financial and Accounting Officer) |

**A      signed original of the written statement above required by Section 906 of the      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to ClearOne Communications, Inc.      and will be retained by ClearOne Communications, Inc. and furnished to the      Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon      request.**
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

DIANE G. MELECH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

) 

vs. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 10-0573-KD-M

) 

LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF )

NORTH AMERICA, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the Order granting Defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment, entered this date, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that 

judgment is entered in favor of Defendants Life Insurance Company of North America, 

Hertz Corporation, and Hertz Corporation Pension and Welfare Plan Administration 

Committee and the claims of Plaintiff Diane G. Melech are dismissed. 

The Court retains jurisdiction to address Plaintiff’s Interim Application for 

Attorneys’ Fees and Costs Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g). (Doc. 211) 

DONE and ORDERED this the 10th day of August 2015.

s/ Kristi K. DuBose 

KRISTI K. DuBOSE

STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:10-cv-00573-KD-M Document 260 Filed 08/11/15 Page 1 of 1
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1469 

To prohibit a mask mandate to prevent the spread of COVID–19 on a 

military installation in the United States. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 8, 2023 

Mr. NORMAN (for himself, Mr. BISHOP of North Carolina, Mr. DUNCAN, Mr. 

GOOD of Virginia, Ms. GREENE of Georgia, Mrs. MILLER of Illinois, and 

Mr. STEUBE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To prohibit a mask mandate to prevent the spread of 

COVID–19 on a military installation in the United States. 

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

3 SECTION 1. PROHIBITION OF MASK MANDATE TO PREVENT 

4 THE SPREAD OF COVID–19 ON A MILITARY IN5 STALLATION IN THE UNITED STATES. 

6 The Secretary of Defense may not require that an 

7 individual wear a mask, in order to prevent the spread 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 1469 IH

1 of COVID–19, on a military installation inside the United 

2 States. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-6045

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

LLOYD GEORGE MAXWELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CR-93-262)

Submitted: March 11, 1999 Decided: March 18, 1999

Before WIDENER and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lloyd George Maxwell, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollenhorst,

Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Lloyd George Maxwell appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his motion filed under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a) (1994).

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. See United States v. Maxwell, No. CR-93-262

(E.D. Va. Dec. 15, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0723

IN THE MATTER OF:

W.J.B.,

Respondent and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including March 29, 2024, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 21 2024

02/21/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0723
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                                 NABISCO, INC.
               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                             (DOLLARS IN MILLIONS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 YEAR ENDED
                                                              DECEMBER 31, 1999
                                                              -----------------
<S>                                                           <C>
Earnings before fixed charges:
  Income before extraordinary item..........................       $  360
  Provision for income taxes................................          222
                                                                   ------
  Income before income taxes................................          582
  Interest expense..........................................          260
  Interest portion of rental expense........................           34
                                                                   ------
Earnings before fixed charges...............................       $  876
                                                                   ======
Fixed charges:
  Interest expense..........................................       $  260
  Interest portion of rental expense........................           34
  Capitalized interest......................................            2
                                                                   ------
    Total fixed charges.....................................       $  296
                                                                   ======
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges..........................          3.0
                                                                   ======
</TABLE>
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00118-CV

__________________

IN RE WINFREE BAPTIST CHURCH

__________________________________________________________________

Original Proceeding

128th District Court of Orange County, Texas

Trial Cause No. A190220-C

__________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Winfree Baptist Church, Relator, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus and 

a motion for temporary relief. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. Relator is a defendant in Trial 

Cause Number A190220-C, Gary Hopkins v. Winfree Baptist Church. Relator seeks 

a writ compelling the Honorable Courtney Arkeen, Judge of the 128th District Court 

of Orange County, Texas, to vacate an order signed on December 2, 2021, and to 

dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221.

Relator requests that the trial, which is currently scheduled to begin in the trial 

court on April 25, 2022, be stayed while this Court considers the mandamus petition. 
2

The Court finds temporary relief is necessary to prevent undue prejudice. It is 

ORDERED that the trial in Trial Cause Number A190220-C is STAYED until our 

opinion issues or until further order of this Court. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.10(b). No 

bond is required of Relator as a condition to any relief herein granted.

The response of the Real Party in Interest, Gary Hopkins, is due April 25, 

2022.

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RELIEF GRANTED. 

ORDER ENTERED April 14, 2022.

PER CURIAM

Before Golemon, C.J., Kreger and Horton, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.41

American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.                                [LOGO]

                                           July 26, 1999


Granite Broadcasting
Attn: W. Don Cornwell
767 Third Avenue, 28th Floor
New York, NY 10017

Dear Mr. Cornwell:

        This will constitute an Amendment to the Primary Television Affiliation
Agreement between American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. ("ABC" or "we") and KNTV
License, Inc. ("KNTV") or "you") dated January 3, 1996 (the "Agreement").

        You and we agree that the Agreement shall terminate effective midnight
at the end of the day July 2, 2000 on the following terms:

        1.      We agree to pay you, in addition to all other compensation due
                to you pursuant to the Agreement, the total sum of $14 million
                within ten (10) days of execution of the Amendment. It is agreed
                that the Amendment will be executed no later than September 1,
                1999.

        2.      Each party shall continue to enjoy its respective rights under
                the Agreement and to be subject to its respective obligations
                under the Agreement until the time of termination herein
                provided.

        3.      Neither party shall have any continuing obligation under the
                Agreement subsequent to the time of termination, provided that
                ABC shall be obligated to pay you any compensation owing to you
                pursuant to Schedule A for broadcasting network sponsored
                programs prior to termination, and further provided that the
                reciprocal indemnification obligations set forth in paragraph
                VI.S. of the Agreement shall continue with respect to materials
                broadcast prior to termination.

        4.      You and we agree to keep confidential the existence and terms of
                this Amendment until a mutually agreeable date which shall be on
                or about September 1, 1999. It is contemplated that the
                termination of KNTV's ABC network affiliation will be announced
                at that time by means of a joint press release or announcement
                or separate press releases or announcements approved by both
                parties.
<PAGE>

Granite Broadcasting                -2-                         July 26, 1999



5.  You and we agree to cooperate to insure an orderly transition in the shift
of ABC network service from KNTV to ABC's new affiliate in the market.


     If the foregoing is in accordance with your understanding, please indicate
your consent by signing the space provided below.

                                   Sincerely yours,


                                   American Broadcasting Companies, Inc.


                                   By:____________________________

                                   Title:___________________________


Accepted and Agreed to by:

KNTV License, Inc.

By:__________________________

Title:_________________________
#### THE STATE ex rel. MOORE, Appellant, v. HAWES et al.

In Banc,

November 3, 1903.

The judgment in this ease is affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. Rife v. Hawes, reported at page 360 of this volume.

Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. *Wm. Zachritz,*Judge.

Akfiemed.

*Joseph Wheless*for appellant.

*C. W. Bates*and *Wm. Woerner*for respondents.

GANTT, J.

Mandamus for salary of himself and seven others, as patrolmen, aggregating $26,327.79. *400Judgment for defendants and relator appealed. All of •¡he claimants except Roe and Hazelhorst had fully served out their appointed terms and were merely holdovers when they were dropped, and hence come within the rule laid down in State ex rel. Rife v. Hawes, reported at page 360 of this volume, and Roe and Hazelhorst were emergency specials, and under the police act held at the pleasure of the hoard, and were subject to removal at any time, without notice, charges or a hearing.

The judgment of the circuit court is for the right party and it is affirmed.

All concur.