alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 15.1

 

November 4, 2002

 

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Genentech, Inc.

We are aware of the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements pertaining to the Genentech, Inc. Tax Reduction Investment Plan, the 1999 Stock Plan, the 1996 Stock Option/Stock Incentive Plan, the 1994 Stock Option Plan, the 1990 Stock Option/Stock Incentive Plan, and the 1991 Employee Stock Plan, and the Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-37072) related to the resale of common shares deliverable upon the exchange of Liquid Yield Option Notes, and in the related prospectuses, as applicable, contained in such Registration Statements of our report dated October 8, 2002 (except for the Note 11, as to which the date is October 11, 2002), relating to the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial statements of Genentech, Inc. that are included in its Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002.

Pursuant to Rule 436(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 our report is not a part of the registration statement prepared or certified by accountants within the meaning of section 7 or 11 of the Securities Act of 1933.

 

**  
Very truly yours,  
**
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

REBECCA CLARK,

Appellant-Below, 

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Appellee-Below, 

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 309, 2019

Court Below: Superior Court

of the State of Delaware.

C.A. No. N18A-03-004 

Submitted: January 8, 220 

Decided: January 31, 2020

Before SEITZ, Chief Justice; VALIHURA and VAUGHN, Justices.

O R D E R

This 31st day of January 2020, the Court having considered this matter on the 

briefs filed by the parties has determined that the final judgment of the Superior 

Court should be affirmed on the basis of and for the reasons assigned by the Superior 

Court in its opinion dated June 19, 2019.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the judgment of the 

Superior Court be, and the same hereby is, AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr.

Justice
**CERTIFICATION        PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, **

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

| Date: February 15, 2007 |   |   |                                     |
|-------------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------|
|                         |   |   | /s/ Waseem                A. Sayed  |
|                         |   |   | Waseem                A. Sayed           |
|                    |   |   | Chief                  Executive Officer |

----
663 A.2d 1349

#### MYSTIC ISLE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, ET AL. v. PERSKIE AND NEHMAD, ET AL. AND WEYMOUTH TOWNSHIP MUNICIPAL UTILITIES AUTHORITY, ET AL.

January 11, 1995.

ORDER

Leave to appeal is granted.
#### In the Matter of Edward Koehl, Appellant, v Dale Artus, as Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility, Respondent.

Submitted January 12, 2009;

decided February 24, 2009

On the Court’s own motion, appeal dismissed, without costs, upon the ground that no substantial constitutional question is directly involved. Motion for leave to appeal denied.
#### William V. Caffery, Appellant, v Time Warner Cable, Inc., Respondent.

[963 NYS2d 891]

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Frederick J. Marshall, J), entered May 1, 2012. The order denied the motion of plaintiff for summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1).

Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties,

It is hereby ordered that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Present—Smith, J.P, Fahey, Sconiers, Valentino and Whalen, JJ.
No. 03-15-00314-CV

IN THE 

COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

AT AUSTIN 

CALIFORNIA INSURANCE GUARANTEE ASSOCIATION, 

OKLAHOMA PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE GUARANTY 

ASSOCIATION, AND TEXAS PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE 

GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, 

 Appellants, 

v. 

HILL BROTHERS TRANSPORTATION, INC., 

 Appellee. 

Appeal from the 201st Judicial District Court, Travis County, Texas 

The Honorable Lora Livingston, Judge Presiding

________________________________________________________________ 

APPEARANCE AND DESIGNATION OF NEW LEAD COUNSEL

NOW COMES Hill Brothers Transportation, Inc., Appellee in the aboveentitled and numbered appeal, and files this Appearance and Designation of New 

Lead Counsel pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1, and in support 

thereof shows the Court the following: 

 Patrick J. Pearsall is no longer with the firm of Duggins Wren Mann & 

Romero, LLP. Marnie A. McCormick hereby appears as new lead counsel on 

behalf of Hill Brothers Transportation, Inc., in the above-entitled and numbered 

appeal. In compliance with Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 6.1(c), Appellee 

offers the following contact information: 

ACCEPTED

03-15-00314-CV

7757032

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

11/10/2015 9:36:43 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERK

 FILED IN 3rd COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 11/10/2015 9:36:43 AM JEFFREY D. KYLE Clerk
APPROVED: 

Mamie A. McCormick 

State Bar No. 00794264 

Duggins Wren Mann & Romero, LLP 

P. 0. Box 1149 

Austin, Texas 78767-1149 

Tel: 512-744-9300 

Fax: 512-744-9399 

Respectfully submitted, 

DUGGINS WREN MANN & ROMERO, LLP 

By: Isl Marnie A. McCormick 

Mamie A. McCormick 

State Bar No. 00794264 

mmccormick@dwmrlw.com 

Adrian R. Ciechanowicz 

State Bar No. 24045659 

aciechanowicz@dwmrlaw.com 

P. 0. Box 1149 

Austin, Texas 78767-1149 

(512) 744-9300 

(512) 744-9399 fax 

ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE 

HILL BROTHERS TRANSPORTATION, 

INC. 

Patrick 

~~ J. Pearsall 

State Bar No. 24047492 

2 
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 As required by Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.5, I certify that on the 

10th day of November, 2015, the foregoing document was electronically filed with 

the Clerk of the Court using the electronic case filing system of the Court, and that 

a true and correct copy was served on the following lead counsel for all parties 

listed below via electronic service: 

Dan Price 

STONE LOUGHLIN & SWANSON, LLP 

P. O. Box 30111 

Austin, Texas 78755 

dprice@slsaustin.com

Counsel for Appellants 

 /s/ Marnie A. McCormick 

 Marnie A. McCormick
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of CEO and CFO

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 Real Estate Associates Limited III (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:



(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 Partnership.





| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/Martha L. Long      
| | Name: Martha L. Long   
| | Date: May 9, 2008      
| |                        
| | /s/Stephen B. Waters   
| | Name: Stephen B. Waters
| | Date: May 9, 2008      





This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2339 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Bilateral Economic 

Assistance, Complex Crises Fund for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Bilateral Economic Assistance, Complex Crises Fund for fiscal 

year 2024. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 BILATERAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE, COM5 PLEX CRISES FUND FOR FISCAL YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise availVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:09 Apr 20, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2339.IH H2339

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 2339 IH

1 able for Bilaterial Economic Assistance, Complex Crises 

2 Fund for fiscal year 2024 may not exceed $30,000,000. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of CEO and CFO

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 Angeles Partners X (the "Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Martha L. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership, and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of the Partnership, each hereby certifies, 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 his knowledge:



(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 Partnership.



| |                        
| | -----------------------
| | /s/Martha L. Long      
| | Name: Martha L. Long   
| | Date: May 9, 2008      
| |                        
| | /s/Stephen B. Waters   
| | Name: Stephen B. Waters
| | Date: May 9, 2008      



This certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
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 on Form 10-K of Deer Consumer Products, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ying He, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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 (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.





Date: September 19, 2011
By:
/s/ Ying HeYing He

Chief Executive Officer





This certification accompanies each Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.1**Certifications**I, J. Collier Sparks, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-QSB of MDI, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded 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 periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining 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 disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Dated:August 14, 2006         By                         /s/ J. Collier Sparks    J. Collier Sparks    Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Scott T. Wilbert, Appellant.

[825 NYS2d 884]

Appeal from an order of the Wayne County Court (Dennis M. Kehoe, J.), dated September 23, 2005. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously modified on the law by determining that defendant is a level two risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order determining that he is a level three risk under the Sex Offender Registration Act ([SORA] Correction Law § 168 *et seq.).*The order is the result of a redetermination hearing conducted upon defendant’s request, in accordance with the stipulation of settlement in *Doe v Pataki*(96 Civ 1657 [Dist Ct]). Although following the redeter*1221mination hearing County Court reduced the total score on the risk assessment instrument from 155 to 135, that score is nevertheless within the range of a level three risk. We agree with defendant, however, that the court should have reduced the total risk factor score on the risk assessment instrument to 80 points and thus should have determined that defendant is a level two risk. The People failed to establish the basis for the assessment of 15 points under risk factor 11, drug or alcohol abuse *(see generally People v Price,*31 AD3d 1114, 1115 [2006]). Indeed, at the redetermination hearing the People presented evidence that defendant became a member of Alcoholics Anonymous after his release from prison and had been alcohol free for eight years *(cf. People v Villane,*17 AD3d 336 [2005]). The People also failed to present evidence establishing the basis for the assessment of 10 points for risk factor 13, conduct while confined/ supervised. The evidence presented at the redetermination hearing established that defendant’s behavior while on parole and thereafter was exemplary and that, although defendant was involved in some physical altercations while incarcerated, his participation was defensive in nature. Finally, the record also establishes that the points assessed under risk factor 9 are duplicative of the points assessed under risk factor 8. We therefore modify the order by determining that defendant is a level two risk. Present—Scudder, PJ., Hurlbutt, Gorski and Martoche, JJ.
665 A.2d 385

#### IN THE MATTER OF DAVID A. BIEDERMAN, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW.

October 16, 1995.

ORDER

DAVID A. BIEDERMAN of SECAUCUS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1959, having pleaded guilty to conspiracy to arrange sham marriages for the purpose of misleading the Immigration and Naturalization Service in obtaining permanent resident visas for aliens in a false and fraudulent manner in violation of 18 *U.S.C.A*§§ 371 and 2 and 8 *U.S.C.A*§ 1324, and good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that pursuant to *Rule*1:20 — 13(b)(1), DAVID A. BIEDERMAN is temporarily suspended from the practice of law pending the final resolution of ethics proceedings against him, effective immediately and until the further order of this Court; and it is further

ORDERED that DAVID A. BIEDERMAN be restrained and enjoined from practicing law during the period of his suspension; and it is further

ORDERED that DAVID A. BIEDERMAN comply with *Rule*1:20-20 dealing with suspended attorneys.
##### 



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 of Foundry Networks, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Timothy D. Heffner, Chief Financial Officer and Vice President
Finance and Administration 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:  (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. /s/ Timothy D. HeffnerTimothy D. Heffner
Chief Financial Officer,
Vice President Finance and AdministrationMarch 11, 2005
#### State v. Moffitt

Case below: 185 N.C. App.-(7 August 2007)

No. 437P07

Def’s PDR Under N.C.G.S. 7A-31 (COA06-1239)

Denied 11/08/07
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Eric P. Williams, Appellant.

[963 NYS2d 899]

Appeal from a judgment of the Genesee County Court (Robert C. Noonan, J.), rendered January 3, 2012. The judgment convicted defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree.

It is hereby ordered that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him upon a plea of guilty of attempted criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree (Penal Law §§ 110.00, 220.16 [1]). We reject defendant’s contention that County Court erred in refusing to order judicial diversion instead of incarceration. The court considered the statutory factors pursuant to CPL 216.05 (3) (b) in making its determination, including whether defendant was eligible for diversion, whether he had a history of drug abuse, whether such abuse was a contributing factor to his criminal behavior, whether diversion could effectively address such abuse, and whether institutional confinement of defendant was necessary for the protection of the public. Courts are afforded great deference in making judicial diversion determinations, and we perceive no abuse of discretion here *(see Matter of Carty v Hall,*92 AD3d 1191, 1192 [2012]; *see generally People v Secore,*102 AD3d 1059, 1060 [2013]; *People v Dawley,*96 AD3d 1108, 1109 [2012], *lv denied*19 NY3d 1025 [2012]; *People v Hombach,*31 Misc 3d 789, 792 [2011]). To the extent that defendant’s contention that he was denied effec*1429tive assistance of counsel survives his guilty plea *(see People v Hawkins,*94 AD3d 1439, 1440-1441 [2012], *lv denied*19 NY3d 974 [2012]), we conclude that his contention lacks merit *(see generally People v Ford,*86 NY2d 397, 404 [1995]). We note that, although defense counsel’s request that defendant be evaluated pursuant to CPL 216.05 was improperly made after defendant entered his plea of guilty, the court ignored that procedural error and reached the judicial diversion issue on the merits. We further conclude that the sentence is not unduly harsh or severe.

Present—Scudder, PJ., Smith, Centra, Carni and Sconiers, JJ.
2015 Q4 10K EX.10.10






Exhibit 10.10


AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO THE
PERRIGO COMPANY
ANNUAL INCENTIVE PLAN
WHEREAS, Perrigo Company (the “Company”), a subsidiary of Perrigo Company plc, sponsors the Perrigo Company Annual Incentive Plan (the “MIB”);
WHEREAS, the Company desires to make certain clarifying changes to the MIB to reflect the change to the fiscal year-end of Perrigo Company plc;
NOW, THEREFORE, the MIB is amended as follows effective as of June 22, 2015:
1.    Section 4 of the MIB (“Awards”) is amended to read as follows:
4.    Awards.  The Committee shall establish, in writing, the Performance Goal(s) to be attained for each Participant for each fiscal year based on one or more Performance Measures, and the payout schedule detailing the total amount which may be available for payout to each Participant based upon the relative level of attainment of the Performance Goal(s) with respect to such Performance Measure(s).  The Committee shall establish the Performance Goal(s) and the Performance Measure(s) by the earlier of (i) the 90th day after commencement of the service period to which the Performance Goal(s) and Measure(s) relate, and (ii) the expiration of 25% of the service period to which the Performance Goal(s) and Measure(s) relate.
2.    Section 5 of the MIB (“Committee Certification”) is amended to read as follows:
5.    Committee Certification.  As soon as reasonably practicable after the end of each fiscal year of the Company, but in no event later than the 15th day of the third month following the end of the Participant’s tax year (or, if later, the Company’s tax year) in which the Participant’s right to a payment vests, the Committee shall certify, in writing, (i) whether and to what extent the Performance Goal(s) for such year were satisfied, and (ii) the amount available for each Participant’s Incentive Bonus for such year based upon the payout schedule established under Section 4 for such Participant for such year.
3.    The second sentence of Section 7 of the MIB (“Payment of Incentive Bonuses”) is amended to read as follows:
Incentive Bonuses shall be paid in cash at such times and on such terms as are determined by the Committee in its sole and absolute discretion, but in no event later than the 15th day of the third month following the end of the Participant’s tax year or the Company’s tax year (whichever is later) in which the Participant’s right to the payment vests.
*    *    *
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Perrigo Company has caused this Amendment No. 1 to be executed by its duly authorized officer this 9th day of July, 2015.
PERRIGO COMPANY




	
		
	By:
	/s/ Judy L. Brown




 	
		
	Title:
	EVP, CFO