alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
23







CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM






We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-136432  on Form S-3 of our reports dated February 27,
2009 relating to the financial statements (and with respect to the report
on those financial statements, expressed an unqualified opinion and
included an explanatory paragraph concerning the adoption of new accounting
pronouncements in 2007 and 2006) and financial statement schedule of Appalachian
Power Company and subsidiaries appearing in and incorporated by
reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Appalachian Power Company
and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2008.








/s/
Deloitte & Touche LLP




Columbus,
Ohio


February 27,
2009
xeri_ex101.htm

  
 EXHIBIT 10.1
 AMENDMENT TO SENIOR SECURED PROMISSORY NOTE
  
 This Amendment to Senior Secured Promissory Note (this “Amendment”) is entered into as of July 26, 2022, between Xeriant, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), and Auctus Fund, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Auctus”)
  
 RECITALS
  
 A. The Company entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement dated as of October 27, 2021 (the “Agreement”) with Auctus pursuant to which the Company issued to Auctus a Senior Secured Convertible Promissory Note in the principal amount of $6,050,000 (the “Note”). Defined terms not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Note.
  
 B. The Company and Auctus desire to amend the Note as set forth herein.
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which hereby are acknowledged, the Company and Auctus hereby agree as follows:
  
 The reference to “twelve (12) months from the Issue Date” in the last sentence of the first paragraph of the Note is hereby replaced with “November 1, 2022”.
  
 The references to “the date that is eight (8) calendar months after the Issue Date” in Sections 3.19 and 3.20 of the Note are hereby replaced with “November 1, 2022”.
  
 Conditions to the Effectiveness of this Amendment. (a) The Company shall grant to Auctus a new warrant to purchase 25,000,000 shares on the same terms of the Warrant (as defined in the Agreement) except that the exercise price shall be $0.09 per share and the term thereof shall commence on July 26, 2022; (b) the Company shall make a prepayment of $100,000 within three business days from the date of this Amendment, and (c) Edward DeFeudis shall cancel his 10b-5(1) Plan. 
  
 Effect of Amendment. Except as expressly amended by this Amendment, all terms of the Note shall remain in full force and effect. 
  
 Execution. This Amendment may be executed in two or more counterparts, including by facsimile, by e-mail in PDF format or by other electronic means, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which together shall constitute one and the same instrument. 
  
 [signature page to follow]
  
  	 
	
	

	 


 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed and delivered this Amendment as of the date first written above.
  
  	  
	 Xeriant, Inc.
	  

	  
	  
	  
	  

	  
	 By:
		  

	  
	  
	 Name: Keith Duffy
	  

	  
	  
	 Title: CEO
	  

	  
	  
	  
	  

	  
	 Auctus Fund, LLC
	  

	  
	  
	  
	  

	  
	 By:
		  

	  
	  
	 Name: Lou Posner
	  

	  
	  
	 Title: Managing Director
	  



 
  
  	 
	2
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

Certifications Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, in connection with the filing of the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Atlantic American Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2014, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company certifies, that, to such officer’s 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 Company as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the Report. |
|--|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date: April 30, 2015 |  | /s/ Hilton H. Howell, Jr.             |
|----------------------|--|---------------------------------------|
|                      |  | Hilton H. Howell, Jr.                 |
|                      |  | President and Chief Executive Officer |
| Date: April 30, 2015 |  | /s/ John G. Sample, Jr.                           |
|----------------------|--|---------------------------------------------------|
|                      |  | John G. Sample, Jr.                               |
|                      |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |

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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
financial statements of Realmark Property Investors Limited Partnership VI-A for
the six months ended June 30, 1999, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                      JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                 39,402
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                          12,904
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      601,207
<PP&E>                             20,577,722
<DEPRECIATION>                      6,869,836
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     14,465,875
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               1,220,719
<BONDS>                            11,348,123
<COMMON>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                  0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       14,465,875
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    2,246,388
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       2,574,929
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    523,307
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      (328,541)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         0
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                         (328,541)
<EPS-BASIC>                           (2.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               0


</TABLE>
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

___________________________

No. 02-22-00486-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 481st District Court

Denton County, Texas

Trial Court No. 21-8447-16

Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker

ANTHONY SEWELL, Appellant

V.

ANGELA SEWELL, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this divorce action, the trial court signed its final decree of divorce on 

August 11, 2022. Appellant Anthony Sewell filed his motion for new trial on 

September 12, 2022, thus extending his deadline for filing a notice of appeal to 

November 9, 2022. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1) (requiring after the filing of motion 

for new trial that notice of appeal be filed within ninety days after the judgment is 

signed). Although the motion was overruled by operation of law on October 25, 

2022, see Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(c), on November 9, 2022, the trial court signed an order 

denying Sewell’s motion for new trial. Sewell then filed his notice of appeal on 

December 9, 2022. 

On December 12, 2022, we informed Sewell of our concern that we lacked 

jurisdiction over his appeal because his notice of appeal was not timely filed. We 

further informed him that, unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed

on or before December 22, 2022, a response showing grounds for continuing this 

appeal, it might be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a). We 

received no such response. 

After the timely filing of a motion for new trial, Appellate courts have 

jurisdiction to consider an appeal only if the notice of appeal was filed within ninety

days of the final judgment. Tex. R. App. P. 26.1(a)(1). An order denying a motion for 

new trial does not extend this deadline. Naaman v. Grider, 126 S.W.3d 73, 74 (Tex. 

2003).
3

Because Sewell’s notice of appeal was filed 120 days after the trial court’s final 

divorce decree, he did not timely perfect his appeal. Thus, we must dismiss his appeal 

for want of jurisdiction. See id.; see also Tex. R. App. P. 26.(1)(a), 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

/s/ Brian Walker

Brian Walker

Justice

Delivered: January 12, 2023
#### UNITED STATES v. FISHMAN et al.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Nov. 14, 1952.

See also 15 F.R.D. 151.

Myles J. Lane, U. S. Atty., New York City, for plaintiff.

Friedman & Friedman, Brooklyn, N. Y., for defendants.

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

In a civil action brought by the United States against movants to recover a statutory penalty of $5,000 under the Wool Products Labeling Act of 1939,1 the United States served upon defendants’ attorneys a notice that it would take defendants’ depositions upon oral examination.

Defendants now move for an order vacating said notice on the ground that de*125fendants may not be compelled to testify against themselves, this suit being one to recover a penalty or forfeiture and therefore quasi-criminal in nature.

Defendants presumably rely on the privilege against self-incrimination granted by Amendment V of the Constitution of the United States.2

An action “to recover a penalty or to enforce a forfeiture” comes within the scope of Fed.Rules Civ.Proc. rule 26, 28 U.S.C.A.3 Rule 26 is, however, subject to the paramount protection afforded by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.4 Defendants having made timely claim to their privilege, the notice is vacated.

Settle order.

1

. 15 U.S.C.A. § 68d.

2

. “No person * * * shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, * *

3

. Moore’s Federal Practice, 2d Ed., Vol. 4, par. 26.05, p. 1032.

4

. Lees v. United States, 150 U.S. 476, 14 S.Ct. 163, 37 L.Ed. 1150; Jobnson v. Donaldson, C.C.S.D.N.Y., 3 F. 22; Wigmore on Evidence, 3d Ed., Vol. VIII, § 2256, p. 330.
EXHIBIT 99.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. 1350)





In connection with
the Quarterly Report of Wells Real Estate Fund II-OW (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the three month period ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned, Leo F. Wells, III, Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, hereby certifies, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350), 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 Registrant.





/s/    LEO F. WELLS,
IIILeo F. Wells, III Chief
Executive Officer





August 12, 2002
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


In connection with the Quarterly Report of CHS
Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended February 29, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, John Schmitz, Executive Vice
President 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 result of operations of the Company.



| |                                                         
| | --------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ JOHN SCHMITZ                                        
| |                                                         
| | John Schmitz                                            
| | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
    Officer

April 7, 2004
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 110 (Wednesday, June 10, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 27560]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-13398]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

United States Parole Commission


Record of Vote of Meeting Closure; (Public Law 94-409) (5 U.S.C. 
Sec. 552b)

    I, Edward F. Reilly, Jr., of the United States Parole Commission, 
was present at a meeting of said Commission, which started at 
approximately 11:30 a.m., on Thursday, May 14, 2009, at the U.S. Parole 
Commission, 5550 Friendship Boulevard, 4th Floor, Chevy Chase, Maryland 
20815. The purpose of the meeting was to decide two petitions for 
reconsideration pursuant to 28 CFR Section 2.27. Four Commissioners 
were present, constituting a quorum when the vote to close the meeting 
was submitted.
    Public announcement further describing the subject matter of the 
meeting and certifications of General Counsel that this meeting may be 
closed by vote of the Commissioners present were submitted to the 
Commissioners prior to the conduct of any other business. Upon motion 
duly made, seconded, and carried, the following Commissioners voted 
that the meeting be closed: Edward F. Reilly, Jr., Cranston J. 
Mitchell, Isaac Fulwood, Jr. and Patricia K. Cushwa.
    In witness whereof, I make this official record of the vote taken 
to close this meeting and authorize this record to be made available to 
the public.

    Dated: May 14, 2009.
Edward F. Reilly, Jr.,
Chairman, U.S. Parole Commission.
[FR Doc. E9-13398 Filed 6-9-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
liventcorpofficerseveran






Livent Corporation  Executive Severance Guidelines for Designated Executives  Background  The intent of these severance guidelines (“Guidelines”) is to provide designated  executives of Livent Corporation (the “Company”) with reasonable transition benefits in  the event of a termination of employment without cause (other than in the context of a  change in control, or as a result of death, disability or retirement).  For this purpose, the  term “designated executive” will have the same meaning as used in the Charter of the  Compensation and Organization Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors (the  “Committee”).  This document is a guideline for the Chief Executive Officer of the  Company and does not create any entitlement for designated executives.  Any deviation  from these Guidelines must be reviewed and approved by the Committee.  Severance Guidelines  Key elements of the Guidelines:  • Severance Pay - Twelve (12) months base salary, payable in a lump sum; - Twelve (12) months of target bonus, payable in a lump sum; and - Prorated target bonus for the year of termination • Medical/Dental Benefits - Twelve (12) months of continued benefits from the termination date at normal employee rates • Long-Term Incentives, Stock Options, Restricted Stock Units and Performance-Based Cash/Equity - Unvested options that would have vested based solely on continued service within one calendar year following termination become exercisable on regularly scheduled dates, and remain exercisable for twelve months thereafter - Twelve (12) months to exercise vested options - Prorated vesting of service-vesting restricted stock units at termination date - PRSUs subject to an open performance period will remain outstanding and be earned (or forfeited) based on actual performance through the end of the performance period, but pro- rated to reflect the portion of the performance period actually worked • Other Transition Benefits - Outplacement assistance ($20K cap) - Vacation pay (earned and unused) - Financial planning assistance for last calendar year of employment - Tax planning for last calendar year of employment Exhibit 10.1 





 






• Conditions  - Designated executive must execute non-compete, non-disclosure  and non-solicitation agreement in a form satisfactory to the Company  - Designated executive must execute and not revoke a release of  claims in a form satisfactory to the Company  Role of the Committee  The Committee approves these Guidelines and any amendments or exceptions  hereto. The Committee should be notified prior to the termination of any designated  executive. These Guidelines will be reviewed periodically to ensure that they are  appropriate and relevant to the market.  Role of Management  Management advises the Committee of any anticipated termination of a designated  executive of the Company, periodically reviews the appropriateness of these  Guidelines, and administers the Guidelines in a fair and evenhanded manner.    Effective Date: August 1, 2022  Livent Corporation 2
96-2029.

#### State v. White.

Ashland C.P. No. 96CRI07366. On motion for order requiring preservation of, and allowing inspection and copying of, videotape of trial. Motion denied.
Document

Exhibit 10.6

QuidelOrtho Corporation 
Restricted Stock Unit Award Grant Notice
(Amended and Restated 2018 Equity Incentive Plan)
Pursuant to Section 6.10 of the QuidelOrtho Corporation Amended and Restated 2018 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), QuidelOrtho Corporation (the “Company”) hereby awards to you a Restricted Stock Unit Award covering the number of shares of the Company’s Common Stock set forth below (the “Award”).  This Award will be evidenced by this Grant Notice and the attached Restricted Stock Unit Award Terms and Conditions (the “Terms and Conditions”).
Recipient:                
Date of Grant:                
Number of Shares Subject to Award:                


Vesting and Settlement:  Subject to the applicable tax withholding requirements, the Restricted Stock Units will vest and be delivered at the time set forth on Exhibit A.


Additional Terms/Acknowledgements:  The undersigned acknowledges receipt of, and understands and agrees to, this Restricted Stock Unit Award Grant Notice, the Restricted Stock Unit Award Terms and Conditions, the Plan and the Plan Prospectus.  You further acknowledge that as of the Date of Grant, this Restricted Stock Unit Award Grant Notice, the Restricted Stock Unit Award Terms and Conditions, the Plan and the Plan Prospectus set forth the entire understanding between the Company and you regarding the acquisition of shares of Common Stock of the Company and supersede all prior oral and written agreements on that subject with the exception of Awards previously granted and delivered to you under the Plan.  You further acknowledge that there may be adverse tax consequences upon the vesting or settlement of the Restricted Stock Units or disposition of the underlying shares and that you have been advised to consult a tax advisor prior to such vesting, settlement or disposition.
QuidelOrtho Corporation    Recipient:
By:             
    Signature    Signature
Title:             Date:     
Date:    
Attachments/Incorporated by Reference:     Restricted Stock Unit Award Terms and Conditions and Amended and Restated 2018 Equity Incentive Plan












Exhibit A
VESTING SCHEDULE
#### Isidro Abascal, Appellant, v City of New York, Respondent.

Submitted March 28, 2011;

decided May 5, 2011

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from the Appellate Division order denying reargument, dismissed upon the ground that such order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied. Motion for poor person relief dismissed as academic.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-7789

DAVID JUNIOR SHIVELEY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PAUL KIRBY, Commissioner,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Charles H. Haden II, Chief

District Judge. (CA-99-392)

Submitted: March 25, 2002 Decided: April 16, 2002

Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David Junior Shiveley, Appellant Pro Se. Dawn Ellen Warfield,

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 Junior Shiveley appeals the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West

1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate

judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. See Shiveley v. Kirby, No. CA-99-

392 (S.D.W. Va. Sept. 17, 2001). 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
##### 



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


In connection with the Quarterly Report of CHS
Inc. (the Company) on Form  10-Q for the
quarterly period ended November 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, John D. Johnson, President and
Chief Executive 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 result of operations of the Company.



| |                                          
| | -----------------------------------------
| | /s/ JOHN D. JOHNSON                      
| |                                          
| | John D. Johnson                          
| | President and Chief Executive
    Officer

January 12, 2005