alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Letter to John Maier 

Re: Enterprise Bridge Consulting Agreement with Hard Rock Sacramento, FM 

October 23, 2019 

Page 3 of 5 

third party; and 3) a third party's right to exercise control over all or any part of the gaming 

activity.13 Accordingly, if a party, other than a tribe, receives a high level of compensation, for a 

long period of time, and possesses some aspect of control, an improper proprietary interest may 

exist. 

Bridge Consulting Agreement Overview 

The Tribe and Hard Rock Sacramento currently have a management contract pending 

before the NIGC. The gaming operation, however, is complete and ready to open. The parties are 

contemplating a Bridge Consulting Agreement that will allow the Tribe, through its 

Development Authority, to manage the gaming operation using Hard Rock's expert advice and 

technical assistance. The Bridge Consulting Agreement will last for a maximum of , or 

until the management contract is approved by the NIGC Chair, whichever occurs first.14 The

parties have not yet executed the Bridge Consulting Agreement. 

Under the Bridge Consulting Agreement, Hard Rock will be primarily responsible for 

providing non-binding advice and technical assistance to the Tribe and Authority on a wide 

range of subjects relating to the gaming operation and its ancillary businesses. 15 In exchange for

Hard Rock's advice and technical assistance, the Tribe has agreed to pay of its net revenues 

as a consulting fee. 16

Management Analysis 

The Bridge Consulting Agreement expressly prohibits Hard Rock from managing-or 

exercising remedies that would allow for it or someone else to manage-the gaming operation, 

providing specific examples of common activities that would be considered management.17

Additionally, the Agreement clarifies that the advice provided by Hard Rock is strictly nonbinding18 and the Tribe may freely choose to accept or reject it.19

There are some provisions in the Agreement that allow Hard Rock to make decisions, but 

these are limited to the Tribe's ancillary non-gaming endeavors (i.e., the Rock Shop, a retail 

store), 20 and the pre-opening period21 before gaming has begun. Although these provisions allow 

13 See, NIGC NOV-11-02 (July 12, 2011); See also City of Duluth v. Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, 

830 F. Supp. 2d 712, 723 (D. Minn. 2011), ajf'd in pertinent part, 702 F.3d 1147 (8th Cir. 2013) (discussing NIGC 

adjudication of proprietary interest provision); See also, Bettor Racing v. National Indian Gaming Comm 'n, 812 

F.3d 648, 652 (81h Cir. 2016).

14 Bridge Consulting Agreement § 1.6

15 Bridge Consulting Agreement § 4.2

16 Bridge Consulting Agreement § 6.6

17 Bridge Consulting Agreement§§ 30.1 and 30.2

18 Bridge Consulting Agreement § 4.2

19 In the case of proposed budget items, the Agreement does call for further discussion between the parties in the

event of disagreement, but the additional discussion does not diminish the Tribe's right to accept or reject the 

Consultant's advice. Bridge Consulting Agreement § 4.11.4 

20 Bridge Consulting Agreement§ 4.19 

21 Bridge Consulting Agreement § 4.9
### _^_ a "H\l CoarfcrP /WWl£ TlOtl-Wk CoUlt\ of Am*f/ b fcbnc* 

### *rfc//<u,f : &A*I V/7/e5« it 11513RBGEIVIBW&-H-da^9-at -^ COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS


### •//) 7^. /W<£ ££££* her&bx aff^U h> fLe Tu^\ftk Co^r-t a^ 

### $n brkjr ihou\- U<l$ P/aucA in VSola&on -h ftfie,lla*H 4Lfes*\

imlr ucel d/U-hry a^J fiit/t/sus -fctta. /Hivrn&Vt leftsi4 U -Hjl fob/- ert- Sk4e luS PtArfrS-Gdbj **\A. TH&lh^otifk}. jH4*m£* C SmJ- Arc iy\ \lfoUH>n -h ftBfr CoU *£ fhtfesit**^ (le${o*<,)\>)\\{ 

### 'frPfeJlfint £*.Acl VifkS^S #LfS/2-l4 M$ *- -Mt-f)*^ -Pz>r JU , TuJll-ftk C&urt- *£ Mfldi -b &?fKP£,l State o-f bo^C PreceSf /* AfV CJ£C &r\d ^b Comfel -Mul loves- Cto+r-h -\r> P&r>&rm tUJr <D#?VM cLte )r\ ComphanoL but XL ife- 5h*At Ce>/isH'fa>-hbrt

- ftfMlM



### bait* Dl-lb-£c?lS. jn ^y FILFniW 6ton*h*e : A^^//^r^^ U Iff I% /c^urtofcrimikiaVapp^,c 

## 7^/^/7/^// Uhrt SEP23S 2ool 5, Smilty Drtrt, AU ,A Be*ji(\i*73L. 79/02. AbelAcosta'Cierk
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 Kaire Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10QSB for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steve Westlund, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best
of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:





(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 Company.








/s/ Steve
Westlund


Steve
Westlund


Chief
Financial Officer





May
19, 2008
**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 Quarterly Report of Kaire Holdings, Inc. (the "Company")
      on
      Form 10QSB for the period ending March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Steve Westlund, Chief
      Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
      best of the undersigned’s knowledge and belief:





(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 Company.








/s/
      Steve Westlund


Steve
      Westlund


Chief
      Executive Officer, President


and
      Director





May
      21,
      2007
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 202 (Wednesday, October 21, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 54021]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-25337]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

International Trade Administration


North Dakota State University, et al., Notice of Consolidated 
Decision on Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscopes

This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, as amended by Pub. L. 106-36; 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR 
part 301). Related records can be viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 
P.M. in Room 3705, U.S. Department of Commerce, 14th and Constitution 
Avenue., NW, Washington, D.C.
Docket Number: 09-048. Applicant: North Dakota State University, Fargo, 
ND 58102. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: JEOL, Japan. 
Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 46973, September 14, 2009.
Docket Number: 09-049. Applicant: Washington State University, Pullman, 
WA 99164. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, 
Czech Republic. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 46973, September 14, 
2009.
Docket Number: 09-050. Applicant: Stanford University, Stanford, CA 
94305. Instrument: Electron Microscope. Manufacturer: FEI Company, the 
Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 74 FR 46973, September 14, 
2009.
Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were 
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is an electron microscope and 
is intended for research or scientific educational uses requiring an 
electron microscope. We know of no electron microscope, or any other 
instrument suited to these purposes, which was being manufactured in 
the United States at the time of order of each instrument.

    Dated: October 15, 2009.
Christopher Cassel,
Director, Subsidies Enforcement Office, Import Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-25337 Filed 10-20-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-S
# ORIGINAL

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA PR 22-0005

IN RE THE MOTION OF PAMELA R. ABELLA FOR ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 

# FILED FEB 01 2022 Bowen Greenwood Clerk of Supreme Court State of Montana ORDER

Pamela R.Abella has filed a motion for admissiontothe Bar ofthe State ofMontana pursuant to RuleV ofthe Rules forAdmission, Admission on Motion. The Bar Admissions Administrator ofthe State Bar ofMontana has informed the Court that the Commission on Character and Fitness has certified that Abella has provided the necessary documentation and has satisfied the requirements prerequisite to admission on motion under Rule V. Abella has also requested, pursuant to Rule X, Rules of Admission, permission to be sworn in remotely, ifpossible, due to the COVID 19 pandemic. Good cause appearing: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that upon payment of any application fees and completion of any other processing requirements as set forth by the Bar Admissions Administrator, Pamela R. Abella may be sworn in to the practice of law in the State of Montana. Arrangements for swearing in may be made by contacting the office ofthe Clerk ofthe Montana Supreme Court, which office will address the process ofremote swearing. The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and to the State Bar ofMontana. DATED this 

### , —day ofFebruary, 2022.

ChiefJustice 02/01/2022

Case Number: PR 22-0005

# J

• Justices
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, March 18, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Donna Powers at 1-888-912-1227, or 954-423-7977.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Area 2 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Wednesday, March 18, 2009, at 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time. For more information please contact Donna Powers. Ms. Powers may be reached at 1-888-912-1227 or 954-423-7977, or you can write to Donna Powers, TAP Office, 1000 South Pine Island Road, Suite 340, Plantation, FL 33324, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include the following: Various IRS issues.

Dated: January 13, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E9-1335 Filed 1-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3053 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3053

  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
       permit the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to be used for 
    transportation and use of dredged materials for abandoned mine 
                  reclamation, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 1, 2010

  Mr. Specter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
       permit the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to be used for 
    transportation and use of dredged materials for abandoned mine 
                  reclamation, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. USE OF ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION FUND FOR TRANSPORTATION 
              AND USE OF DREDGED MATERIALS FOR ABANDONED MINE 
              RECLAMATION.

    (a) In General.--Section 401(c)(1) of the Surface Mining Control 
and Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1231(c)(1)) is amended by 
inserting ``transportation and use of dredged materials for abandoned 
mine reclamation;'' after ``coal mine subsidence;''.
    (b) Implementation.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall be 
applied to permit the Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund to be used under 
section 401(c) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 
1977 (30 U.S.C. 1231(c)) to allow dredged materials derived from the 
Delaware River Deepening Project, and from annual Delaware River 
maintenance dredging, to be used for reclamation of abandoned mines in 
Northeast, Pennsylvania.
                                 <all>
```
Document

Exhibit 10.4

SECOND AMENDMENT 
TO 
AMENDED AND RESTATED EXHIBITOR SERVICES AGREEMENT


This Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Exhibitor Services Agreement (this “Amendment”), dated July 29, 2022 (the “Amendment Effective Date”), is by and between National CineMedia, LLC (“LLC”) and Cinemark USA, Inc. (“Cinemark”). Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the respective meanings given to them in the Amended and Restated Exhibitor Services Agreement between LLC and Cinemark, dated as of February 13, 2007 and amended and restated as of December 26, 2013 (the “ESA”).
WHEREAS, NCM and Cinemark desire to amend the ESA as provided in this Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of National CineMedia, Inc. (“NCM Parent”) and a special committee of members of the Board of Directors of NCM Parent have deemed this Amendment to be in the best interest of NCM Parent and its shareholders. 
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the mutual covenants and conditions set forth below, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows:


1.Termination Date of Post-Showtime Inventory and Post-Showtime Theatre Access Fees. The references to “August 1, 2022” and “November 1, 2022” in Section 9.02A of the ESA are deleted and replaced with “January 1, 2023” and “April 1, 2023,” respectively. 
2.Remaining Terms; Conflicts. Except as modified by this Amendment, all terms and conditions of the ESA shall remain in full force and effect. To the extent there is a conflict between the terms of the ESA and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall control.
Remainder of page intentionally left blank; signature page follows.











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have, by their respective duly authorized representatives, executed this Amendment as of the Amendment Effective Date.


									
	National CineMedia, LLC
By National CineMedia, Inc., its manager


/s/ Thomas Lesinski
		Cinemark USA, Inc.




/s/ Michael Cavalier

	Signature		Signature
	Thomas F. Lesinski		Michael Cavalier
	Printed Name		Printed Name
	Chief Executive Officer		Executive Vice President – General Counsel
	Title		Title






Signature Page to Second Amendment to Amended and Restated Exhibitor Services Agreement
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6498

DAVID LAWRENCE DIXON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

THOMAS MCBRIDE, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Chief

District Judge. (CA-03-376-1)

Submitted: May 13, 2004 Decided: May 20, 2004

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Lawrence Dixon, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield, Jon

Rufus Blevins, Darrell V. McGraw, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY

GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

David Lawrence Dixon seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a § 2254

proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate

of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of

appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the

denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000).

A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable

jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Dixon has not made the

requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
----

Exhibit 32.2 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 
I, Michael Ash, CFO of The Tirex Corporation (the "Company")do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge: 

1.    This Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the period ended March31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "report"),fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and 

2.    The information contained in the report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. 

/s/ Michael Ash             Michael Ash, CFO 

Date: May 14, 2007
EXHIBIT 24



                        POWER OF ATTORNEY

                    APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY
      ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 1O-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED
      __________________DECEMBER_31,_1995_________________


     The undersigned directors of APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY, a
Virginia corporation (the "Company"), do hereby constitute and
appoint E. LINN DRAPER, JR., G. P. MALONEY and P. J. DeMARIA, and
each of them, their attorneys-in-fact and agents, to execute for
them, and in their names, and in any and all of their capacities,
the Annual Report of the Company on Form lO-K, pursuant to Section
13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 1995, and any and all amendments thereto, and to
file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in
connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them,
full power and authority to do and perform every act and thing re-
quired or necessary to be done, as fully to all intents and
purposes as the undersigned might or could do in person, hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, or any of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have signed these presents
this 28th day of February, 1996.



_/s/_P._J._DeMaria____________     _/s/_G._P._Maloney____________
P. J. DeMaria                      G. P. Maloney


_/s/_E._Linn_Draper,_Jr.______     _/s/_James_J._Markowsky_______
E. Linn Draper, Jr.                James J. Markowsky


_/s/_Henry_W._Fayne___________     _/s/_J._H._Vipperman__________
Henry W. Fayne                     J. H. Vipperman


_/s/_Wm._J._Lhota_____________
Wm. J. Lhota



[ANNUAL\103.96C]<PAGE>
97-410.

#### State ex rel. Okocha & Assoc. Co., L.P.A. v. Court of Appeals, Eighth Ohio Appellate Dist.

In Mandamus and Prohibition. *Sun sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.