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

National Indian Gaming Commission

CHIEF OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

S. JUSTIN PLATT

Justin Platt is the Chief of Public Affairs for the National Indian Gaming 

Commission, an independent federal regulatory agency established within the 

Department of the Interior. Platt directs the Division of Public Affairs, 

responsible for national policy, planning, management, execution and evaluation 

of communication programs encompassing public affairs, legislative and 

intergovernmental affairs, outreach, training, and internal agency 

communications.

Prior to joining the NIGC, Platt served as the strategic communications lead for 

the GEOINT Services office at the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency 

(NGA), where he was responsible for planning, resourcing and executing the 

overall strategic communications program, including developing a federal interagency outreach program promoting the agency’s geospatial capabilities to 

intelligence community (IC) and military partners. 

Platt began his public relations career with the U.S. Army, serving in every 

echelon of military public affairs from the tactical to the federal enterprise level. 

While assigned to the Pentagon, he served as the Department of the Army’s spokesman for personal policy issues, and 

public affairs officer for two Presidential appointees, Secretaries of the Army Hon. John McHugh and Hon. Eric 

Fanning. After retiring from the Army in 2017, he joined the Edelman’s Media Strategies practice, providing strategic 

media relations counsel to federal, veteran nonprofit, and defense sector clients such as the Departments of Commerce 

and Veterans Affairs, Veterans of Foreign Wars, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and Fincantieri Marine Group.

Platt graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from the U.S. Military Academy, and holds a master’s in 

Composition and Literature from the University of Minnesota. 

The Indian Gaming Regulatory Act created the National Indian Gaming Commission to support tribal self-sufficiency and the integrity of Indian gaming. 

NIGC oversees the efficient regulation of 524 gaming establishments operated by 248 tribes across 29 states.

Updated 7/22/2022
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3253 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3253

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, 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. ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF PROGRAMS 
              UNDER THE SMALL BUSINESS ACT AND THE SMALL BUSINESS 
              INVESTMENT ACT OF 1958.

    (a) In General.--Section 1 of the Act entitled ``An Act to extend 
temporarily certain authorities of the Small Business Administration'', 
approved October 10, 2006 (Public Law 109-316; 120 Stat. 1742), as most 
recently amended by section 1 of Public Law 111-136 (124 Stat. 6), is 
amended by striking ``April 30, 2010'' each place it appears and 
inserting ``July 31, 2010''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on April 29, 2010.

            Passed the Senate April 22, 2010.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
111th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3253

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the 
 Small Business Act and the Small Business Investment Act of 1958, and 
                          for other purposes.
```
Exhibit
10.7





Summary
of Compensation Arrangements with Directors


2009
Fiscal Year





Art’s-Way Manufacturing Co.,
Inc.  (the “Company”) currently does not have a written Board
compensation plan. For the 2009 fiscal year, the Board determined that each of
the Company’s directors would receive a cash retainer fee for his service, paid
as follows:





Director Name
                            
                            Compensation during
                              Fiscal Year 2009J.
      Ward McConnell, Jr.
                              Executive
      Chairman of the Board
                            
                            $
                            150,000Marc
      H. McConnell
                              Executive
      Vice Chairman of the Board
                            
                            $
                            58,000Thomas
      E. Buffamante
                            
                            $
                            30,000David
      R. Castle
                            
                            $
                            30,000Fred
      W. Krahmer
                            
                            $
                            30,000James
      Lynch
                            
                            $
                            30,000Douglas
      McClellan
                            
                            $
                            30,000





The Company also reimburses directors
for out-of-pocket expenses related to their attendance at board meetings and
performance of other services as Board members.





In addition, pursuant to the Company’s
2007 Non-Employee Directors’ Stock Option Plan, each director is automatically
granted non-qualified stock options to purchase 2,000 (post-split) shares of the
Company’s common stock each year on the date of the Annual Meeting of
Stockholders.
DISCIPLINARY DOCKET

DD-100.

#### Mahoning Cty. Bar Assn. v. Alexander.

On February 18, 1997, relator, Mahoning County Bar Association, filed a motion for order to appear and show cause, requesting the court to issue an order directing respondent, George M. Alexander, to appear and show cause why he should not be found in contempt of this court. On April 1, 1997, the court granted the motion and ordered respondent to respond, in writing, within twenty days of the order why he should not be found in contempt. Respondent did not respond. Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that respondent is found in contempt and ordered to appear in person before this court on June 10,1997, at 9:00 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this court issue certified copies of this order as provided for in Gov.Bar R. V(8)(D)(1).
Exhibit 12(e)Entergy Mississippi, Inc.Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges andRatios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges and Preferred Dividends2001
2002
2003
2004
2005Fixed charges, as defined:Total Interest
$50,991
$45,464
$47,464
$44,637
$43,707Interest applicable to rentals
1,849
1,916
1,880
1,162
771Total fixed charges, as defined
52,840
$47,380
$49,344
$45,799
$44,478Preferred dividends, as defined (a)
4,674
4,490
5,099
5,067
5,129Combined fixed charges and preferred dividends, as defined
$57,514
$51,870
$54,443
$50,866
$49,607Earnings as defined:Net Income
$39,620
$52,408
$67,058
$73,497
$62,103Add:Provision for income taxes:Total income taxes
20,464
17,846
34,431
37,040
33,952Fixed charges as above
52,840
47,380
49,344
45,799
44,478Total earnings, as defined
$112,924
$117,634
$150,833
$156,336
$140,533Ratio of earnings to fixed charges, as defined
2.14
2.48
3.06
3.41
3.16Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges andpreferred dividends, as defined
1.96
2.27
2.77
3.07
2.83------------------------(a) "Preferred dividends," as defined by SEC regulation S-K, are computed by dividing the preferred dividend
      requirement by one hundred percent (100%) minus the income tax rate.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 15, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice 131844 & (27)(28) Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan SHERMAN TOWNSHIP, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 131844 COA: 269020 St. Joseph CC: 03-001068-CZ JOSEPH A. LEEMREIS AND LORI M. LEEMREIS, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion for immediate consideration is GRANTED. The application for leave to ap peal the June 29, 2006 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we ar e not persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to stay the trial court proceedings is
DENIED.

K ELLY
, J., would grant leave to appeal.

p1108 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 15, 2006

Clerk
**EXHIBIT 32**

CERTIFICATION

(PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

(Subsections(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, UnitedStates Code)

Pursuant tosection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Apogee Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation(the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

Thequarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007(the “Form 10-QSB”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,and the information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results of operations of theCompany.
| Dated: May 15, 2007  |   |                                        |
|---------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|
|                           | /s/    |                                        | Herbert M. Stein |   |
|                      |   | Herbert M. Stein                            |   |
|                      |   | Chairman of the  Board,                     |   |
|                      |   | President, Chief  Executive Officer         |   |
|                      |   | (principal  executive officer)              |   |
|                      |   |                                        |
|                      |   |                                        |
| Dated: May 15,  2007 | /s/    |                                        | Paul J.Murphy |   |
|                      |   | Paul J. Murphy                              |   |
|                      |   | Chief Financial  Officer and Vice President |   |
|                      |   | Finance  (principal financial officer and   |   |
|                      |   | principal  accounting officer)              |   |
|                           |        |                                             |  |  |  |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
#### CHIN NEE DEU, as father and next friend of Chin Ai Sun and Chin Ai Sun, Plaintiffs, v. John Foster DULLES, as Secretary of State of the United States of America, Defendant.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

Nov. 28, 1955.

*351Samuel B. Waterman, New York City, for plaintiffs.

Lloyd F. MacMahon, U. S. Atty., New York City, for defendant.

2

. Fong Sik Leung v. Dulles, 9 Cir., 226 F.2d 74, concurring opinion of Boldt, D. J.

3

. Tee Szet Foo v. Dulles, D.C.S.D.N.Y., 18 F.R.D. 237.

SUGARMAN, District Judge.

In an action by Chin Nee Deu, as father and next friend of Chin Ai Sun, a minor, and Chin Ai Sun against the Secretary of State under Section 503 of the Nationality Act of 1940 [now Immigration and Nationality Act, § 360, 8 U.S. C.A. § 1503], for a declaratory judgment that Chin Ai Sun is a citizen of the United States, defendant moves for an order, (1) requiring that the said plaintiffs and Mar Tuey King, the alleged wife of Chin Nee Deu and mother of Chin Ai Sun, each submit to a blood test to determine whether paternity exists between the infant plaintiff and his alleged parents pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 1, 28 U.S.C.A., and 35(a) and § 306-a of the New York Civil Practice Act and local Civil Rule 13; (2) granting defendant leave to take the oral examinations of plaintiffs pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 26, and (3) directing plaintiffs to “bring with them all books, documents and papers concerning their relationship and such other documents or papers which will be used as evidence at the trial to prove such relationship” pursuant to F.R.Civ.P. 34.

The power of the court to order the infant plaintiff Chin Ai Sun to submit to the blood test is clear.1 Regardless of the gratuitous inclusion in the title of the complaint of the father Chin Nee Deu “as father and next friend of 'Chin Ai Sun” as a plaintiff, neither he nor the mother Mar Tuey King is a party within the meaning of F.R.Civ.P. 35(a) 2 subject to physical examination under that rule or Rule 13 of the Civil Rules of this court and § 306-a of the New York Civil Practice Act.3

In view of the prayer in the moving papers that the blood tests sought are “to determine whether the claimed paternity exists between the plaintiff Chin Ai Sun, and his alleged parents”, there appears to be no purpose in ordering even the blood test of the said Chin Ai Sun in the absence of comparative tests of the alleged parents. Hence the first branch of the motion is denied.

The second branch of the motion is denied as unnecessary.4

The third branch of the motion is denied. No affidavit showing good cause for the production of the sought after books, documents and papers accompanies the defendant’s notice of motion.5

It is so ordered.

1

. F.R.Civ.P. 35(a); 4 Moore’s Fed.Prac., 2d Ed., para. 35.04.

4

. 4 Moore’s Fed.Prac., 2d Ed., para. 26.09 [1], footnote 1.

5

. 4 Moore’s Fed.Prac., 2d Ed., para. 34.07.
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3244 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 22, 2010 

Referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of 

such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

AN ACT 

To provide that Members of Congress shall not receive a 

cost of living adjustment in pay during fiscal year 2011. 

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

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS

2 

S 3244 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. NO COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENT IN PAY OF 

2 MEMBERS OF CONGRESS. 

3 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no ad4 justment shall be made under section 601(a) of the Legis5 lative Reorganization Act of 1946 (2 U.S.C. 31) (relating 

6 to cost of living adjustments for Members of Congress) 

7 during fiscal year 2011. 

Passed the Senate April 22, 2010. 

Attest: NANCY ERICKSON, 

Secretary. 

mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 31.1


                                CERTIFICATION

I, John N. Hanna certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of YoCream
International, Inc. (the registrant);

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of
a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were
made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included 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 periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal
quarter (registrants fourth quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls
over financial reporting.


/s/ John N. Hanna                                    Dated:  June 14, 2004
-----------------
John N. Hanna, Chief Executive Officer
Order filed October 11, 2013 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-13-00846-CR

____________

GARY WAYNE FILM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 185th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1361607

ORDER

Our review has determined that relevant items have been omitted from the 

clerk’s record filed in this court. See Tex. R. App. P. 34.5(c). The record does not 

contain:

(1) the indictment or information, any special plea or defense motion that 

was presented to the court and overruled, any written waiver, any written 

stipulation, and, in cases in which a plea of guilty or nolo contendere has been 

entered, any documents executed for the plea;
(2) the court's docket sheet;

(3) the court's charge and the jury's verdict, or the court's findings of fact and 

conclusions of law;

(4) the court's judgment or other order that is being appealed;

(5) any request for findings of fact and conclusions of law, any postjudgment motion, and the court's order on the motion;

(6) any formal bill of exception;

(7) any request for a reporter's record, including any statement of points or 

issues under Rule 34.6(c);

(10) any request for preparation of the clerk's record; and

(11) any filing that a party designates to have included in the record.

The Harris County District Clerk is directed to file a supplemental clerks 

record on or before October 21, 2013, containing the items listed above.

If any of the omitted items are not part of the case file, the district clerk is 

directed to file a supplemental clerk’s record containing a certified statement that 

the omitted item is not a part of the case file.

PER CURIAM
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-17-0000476 06-DEC-2019 07:55 AM
#### James Carr et al., Respondents, v Grace Sullivan et al., Defendants, Atlas Fuel Oil Corp. et al., Respondents, and Royal & Sun Alliance USA, Appellant. (And a Third-Party Action.)

[822 NYS2d 448]

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered January 18, 2005, unanimously withdrawn in accordance with the correspondence of the parties hereto. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Sullivan, J.E, Nardelli, Williams, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-8528
MICHAEL L. JORDAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LONNIE M. SAUNDERS; RON ANGELONE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-95-1215) Submitted: March 21, 1996 Decided: April 16, 1996 Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael L. Jordan, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying his motion to vacate the judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm substantially on the reasoning of the district court. Jordan v. Saunders , No. CA-95-1215 (W.D. Va. Nov. 17 & 30, 1995). See generally Hanvey v. Blankenship , 631 F.2d 296, 297 (4th Cir. 1980) (prison officials do not violate inmate's Constitutional rights when they seize contraband). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
{"agency":"NIGC","generated":"2021-04-22 16:47:59","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"},{"label":"2017","value":"2017"},{"label":"2018","value":"2018"},{"label":"2019","value":"2019"},{"label":"2020","value":"2020"}],"value":"2021"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q2"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"3"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"2"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["NIGC"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["3"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["5"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["2"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2021","quarter":"Q2"}