alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                 EXHIBIT 10.125

                                   DEMAND NOTE

$240,000.00                                                  New York, New York
                                                               November 2, 1998

        FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Wilshire Technologies, Inc. a
California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Borrower"), hereby
unconditionally PROMISES TO PAY to the order to TRILON DOMINION PARTNERS, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company ("Lender"), at 245 Park Avenue, 28th Floor,
New York, NY 10167, or at such other place as the holder of this Demand Note may
designate from time to time in writing, in lawful money of the United States of
America and in immediately available funds, the principal amount of Two Hundred
Forty Thousand and 00/100, DOLLARS ($240,000.00), together with interest on the
unpaid principal amount of this Demand Note outstanding from time to time from
the date hereof, at a rate per annum equal to the Prime rate of interest of 8.5%
plus 3.0%, or the highest rate permitted by law, whichever shall be less.

        The principal amount of the indebtedness evidenced hereby shall be
payable on demand. Interest thereon shall be paid when principal is paid from
the date hereof until such principal amount is paid in full at such interest
rate as specified above. Following failure to pay on demand, Borrower agrees to
pay interest on any overdue payment of principal at a rate per annum equal to
the stated interest rate plus 5%, or the highest rate permitted by law,
whichever shall be less. All interest calculations shall be computed on the
basis of a 360 day year.

        Demand, presentment, protest and notice of nonpayment and protest are
hereby waived by Borrower.

        Borrower shall have no right to make any off-set against or deduct from
any payment due under this Demand Note.

        Principal and interest may be prepaid at any time without penalty.

        This Demand Note may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in
writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of such change is
sought.

        All covenants of Borrower in this Demand Note and all rights of the
holder under this Demand Note shall bind Borrower and its successors and
assigns, and all such covenants and rights shall inure to the benefit of the
holder of this Demand Note and its successors and assigns.

        This Demand Note has been delivered and accepted at New York, New York
and shall be interpreted, governed by, and construed in accordance with, the
laws of the State of New York.

                                            Wilshire Technologies, Inc.

                                            By:  /s/ James W. Klingler  
                                            -----------------------------
                                            Name: James W. Klingler

                                            Title: Chief Financial Officer
No. 807.

#### Feinberg *v.*United States.

February 2, 1942.

*Messrs. Everett Jennings*and *George D. Sullivan*for petitioner. *Solicitor General Fahy, Assistant Attorney General Berge,*and *Mr. Oscar A. Provost*for the United States.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
# Permanent Employees

                      - Salary Table
                      - New Employee Benefit Information
                      - Retirement Information
                      - FastFacts for New/Newly Eligible Federal Employees
                      - Security Guidelines
                      - P-10, Employee Conduct and Responsibility.
                      - P-77, Request for Official Correspondence, Net Check, Residence Info
                      - P-09, Conditions of Employment (WAE)
                      - BLM1400-71, Personal Emergency Information Form
                      - Concur User Profile and FBMS Vendor Master Setup Form

## OPM's website

                      - SF-181 Ethnicity and Race Identification
                      - SF-256 Self-Identification of Disability
                      - SF-2809 Health Benefits Election
                      - RI-70-1 Guide to Federal Employees Health Benefits Plans
                      - SF-2817 Life Insurance Election
                      - RI-76-21 FEGLI Booklet
                      - SF-144 Statement of Prior Federal Service
                      - RI 20-97 Estimated Earnings During Military Service
                      - SF-1152 Designation of Beneficiary (Unpaid Comp)

## IRS website

                      - Form W-4

## Treasury website

                      - Form 2231 Fast Start Direct Deposit Form

## Thrift Savings Plan (TSP) website

                      - TSP-1  (Thrift Savings Plan Election Form)
                      - TSP Booklet  (TSP at a Glance)

## Human Resources

-  Human Resources Contacts 
-  Benefits 
-  eOPF 
-  Employee Relations 
-  Ethics 
-  Forms    -  Permanent Employees 
  -  Temporary Employees 
  -  Transfer Employees (within BLM) 
  -  Transfer Employees (within DOI) 
  -  Transfer Employees (outside DOI) 
-  Jobs and Human Resources 
-  Telework 
-  OWCP 
-  Performance Management 
-  Rating Management 
-  Retirement 
-  Security 
-  Manager’s Corner
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 54058]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25281]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health & Human 
Development; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel, Bioinformatics Resource.
    Date: October 27, 2009.
    Time: 2:30 p.m. to 4 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Norman Chang, Ph.D, Scientific Review Officer, 
Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National 
Institute of Child Health And Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive 
Blvd., Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#97f4fff6f9f0f9d7faf6fefbb9f9feffb9f0f8e1"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="4c2f242d222b220c212d252062222524622b233a">[email protected]</span></a>.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 14, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-25281 Filed 10-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit No. 32.1


Alliance Health, Inc.


File No. 33-17387


Form 10-Q


Quarter ended December 31, 2011





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 Alliance Health, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sarkis J. Kechejian, Chief Executive and 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:




(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: February 11, 2011
/s/ Sarkis J. Kechejian, M. D.Sarkis J. Kechejian, M. D.Chief Executive Officerand Chief Financial Officer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Alliance Health, Inc. and will be retained by Alliance Health, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTH PERIOD ENDED FEBRUARY 28, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                              50
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,110
<ALLOWANCES>                                        89
<INVENTORY>                                        969
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,227
<PP&E>                                           9,388
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (6,284)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  10,471
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,833
<BONDS>                                            911
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         4,235
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,980)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    10,471
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                16,689
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,513
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 323
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      8
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  8
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         8
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Darrell BARNES, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 08-4971.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 16, 2009.

Decided: May 6, 2009.

Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, John A. Dusenbury, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Anand P. Ramas-wamy, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Darrell Barnes appeals from the revocation of his supervised release and the imposition of an eight-month prison term to be followed by a fifty-two-month term of supervised release. Barnes’ attorney has filed a brief pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), concluding that there were no meritorious issues for appeal but questioning the length of the supervised release term. Although informed of his right to do so, Barnes has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. We affirm.

When a court revokes supervised release and imposes a term of imprisonment, it may also reimpose a term of supervised release. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(h) (2006). “The length of such a term of supervised release shall not exceed the term of supervised release authorized by statute for the offense that resulted in the original term of supervised release, less any term of imprisonment that was imposed upon revocation of supervised release.” *Id.*Thus, when the district court revoked Barnes’ supervised release and imposed an active prison term of eight months, it had the authority to impose up to fifty-two months of supervised release (sixty month statutory maximum based upon Barnes’ underlying convictions minus eight months). *See United States v. Maxwell,*285 F.3d 336, 342 (4th Cir.2002).

In accordance with *Anders,*we have examined the entire record in this case and found no meritorious issues for review. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the Unit*174ed States for further review. If the client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. 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 Matter of Audrey Moore, Appellant, v John B. Rhea et al., Respondents.

[974 NYS2d 413]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen A. Rakower, J.), entered July 31, 2012, denying the petition to annul respondent’s determination, dated November 16, 2011, which terminated petitioner’s tenancy on the ground of chronic rent delinquency, and dismissing the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Respondent’s determination that petitioner was chronically delinquent in the payment of rent was rationally based on the record *(see Matter of Partnership 92 LP & Bldg. Mgt. Co., Inc. v State of N.Y. Div. of Hous. & Community Renewal,*46 AD3d 425, 428 [1st Dept 2007], *affd*11 NY3d 859 [2008]). A rent ledger showed that, between June 2010 and October 2011, petitioner paid rent in only a single month, and that, during this time, her outstanding rent balance grew from an initial deficit of $355.70 to a final balance of $2,591.20.

Petitioner’s contentions that the Hearing Officer failed to comply with, or give adequate consideration to, a number of the tenancy termination provisions set forth in respondent’s management manual are unpreserved, as she raised these arguments neither at the administrative hearing *(see Matter of Torres v New York City Hous. Auth.,*40 AD3d 328, 330 [1st Dept 2007]) nor before Supreme Court *(see Logiudice v Logiudice,*67 AD3d 544, 545 [1st Dept 2009]). Assuming without deciding that they apply in this type of proceeding, we would find them unavailing, as respondent made extensive efforts to secure payment prior to initiating termination proceedings.

Petitioner did not present evidence which would have established a defense of breach of the warranty of habitability. Nor did the “Hearing Officer have an obligation to develop the record on petitioner’s behalf, even though she was pro se” *(Matter of Rivera v New York City Hous. Auth.,*107 AD3d 404, 405 [1st Dept 2013]).

*446Petitioner’s argument that the Hearing Officer acted arbitrarily in denying her request for reconsideration also fails. Petitioner has not pointed to any rule or regulation that would entitle her to request administrative reconsideration of a final agency determination. In any event, even under the standards governing judicial reconsideration, reargument was not warranted, since the fact that petitioner might have become current with her rent subsequent to the hearing would not negate the determination, based on the evidence presented at the hearing, of chronic rent delinquency *(see Rivera*at 405).

The penalty imposed does not shock our sense of fairness *(see Matter of Devins v New York City Hous. Auth.,*92 AD3d 581, 582 [1st Dept 2012]).

We have considered petitioner’s remaining contentions, including that she was deprived of procedural due process, and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.E, Andrias, Friedman, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
No. 184.

#### Buck, President of the American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, et al. *v.*Case, State Treasurer of Washington, et al.

January 19, 1942.

*Messrs. Thomas G. Haight, Louis D. Frohlich,*and *Herman Finkelstein*for appellants. *Messrs. Smith Troy*and *John E. Belcher*for appellees.

*Per Curiam:*

The motion of appellee Lockhart to reinstate this case on the calendar is denied. On consideration of the stipulation of counsel the appeal is dismissed without costs. Mr. Justice Jackson took no part in the consideration and decision of this case.
**Exhibit 32****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 Warren Resources, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year endingDecember 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “report”), we,Norman F. Swanton and Timothy A. Larkin, Chairman and ChiefExecutive Officer and Executive Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer, respectively, of the registrant, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuantto § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that toour 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 registrant.     /s/ Norman F. Swanton       Norman F. Swanton     Chairman and Chief Executive Officer      /s/ Timothy A. Larkin       Timothy A. Larkin     Executive Vice President and Chief Financial OfficerMarch 15, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Corey E. Becoats, Appellant.

Submitted November 1, 2010;

decided November 23, 2010

Motion for reargument of motion for leave to appeal granted and, upon reargument, Kristin E Splain, Esq., Monroe County Conflict Defender, 80 West Main Street, Suite 300, Rochester, New York 14614 is assigned in the place and stead of Donald M. Thompson, Esq., care of Easton Thompson Kasperek Shiffrin LLI? as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
Exhibit 31.1
  I, Thomas A. Daiber, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Centrue FinancialCorporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows ofthe registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrantand have:
a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made knownto us by others within those entities, particularly during theperiod in which this report is being prepared; b) [intentionally omitted] c) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and d) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourthfiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, basedon our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting.        Date: March 29, 2004 /s/ Thomas A. Daiber   Thomas A. Daiber   Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant-Respondent, v John Freeman, Respondent-Appellant.

Submitted September 27, 2010;

decided October 14, 2010

Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Lynn W.L. Fa-hey, Esq., Appellate Advocates, 2 Rector Street, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10006 assigned as counsel to the respondent-appellant on the appeal herein.
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 of WNC California Housing
Tax Credits III, L.P. (the  "Partnership")  for the year ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  and  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section  1350,  as adopted  pursuant to
section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of  2002,  I,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Chief
Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership,
hereby certify 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  result  of
               operations of the Partnership.


/s/THOMAS J. RIHA
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
September 24, 2004