alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# CREATE Bio Application Support Library

CREATE Bio: Compare Discovery & Development Tracks

CREATE Bio Example: Antibody Agent Profile Table

CREATE Bio Example: Anti-sense-oligonucleotides Agent Profile Table

CREATE Bio Example: Cell Therapy Product Profile FAQ Reference

CREATE Bio Example: Gene Therapy Agent Profile Table/Reference

CREATE Bio Example: Milestones

CREATE Bio Example: Peptides or Protein Agent Profile Table

CREATE Bio Example: Sample Timeline

CREATE Bio Example: Target Product Profile (TPP)

CREATE Bio Webinars

CREATE Bio Program FAQs

CREATE Bio Program Pre-Application Process & Background
**EXHIBIT 32**

 

CERTIFICATION

 

(PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

 

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

 

Pursuant to section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer ofApogee Technology, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), doeshereby certify, to such officer’s knowledge, that:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterended June 30, 2008 (the “Form 10-Q”) of the Company fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

 
| Dated: August 14, 2008 |   | /s/    | Herbert M. Stein                           |
|-----------------------------|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
|                        |   |   | Herbert M. Stein                           |
|                        |   |   | Chairman of the Board,                     |
|                        |   |   | President, Chief Executive Officer         |
|                        |   |   | (principal executive officer)              |
|                        |   |   |                                       |
|                        |   |   |                                       |
| Dated: August 14, 2008 |   | /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.

 

----
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y A lton Thomas Davis,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk November 22, 2010

s1115 

# Order

November 22, 2010

141572

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141572 COA: 290131 Saginaw CC: 08-030280-FC DEONTAE TRAVOHN DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 22, 2010 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(H)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Court of Appeals for

consideration of an issue ra ised by the defendant but not addressed in that court’s opinion: whether the circuit court erroneously allowed the statement of the defendant’s co-defendant, Caprice Mack, to be introdu ced into eviden ce through the preliminary examination testimony of Travis Crowley. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, because we are not pe rsuaded that the remaining qu estions presen ted should be reviewed by this Court.
Motion Granted; Order filed October 9, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-17-00157-CV

____________

JOSE DOMINGUEZ, Appellant

V.

AMERICAN EXPRESS BANK FSB, Appellee

On Appeal from the 434th Judicial District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 12-DCV-202842

ORDER

Appellant’s brief was originally due June 1, 2018. We granted several

extensions of time due to difficulties in obtaining a full reporter’s record. When we 

granted the final extension through October 1, 2018, we noted that no further 

extensions would be granted absent exceptional circumstances. No brief was filed. 

On September 13, 2018, a supplemental reporter’s record was filed. On October 1, 

2018, appellant filed a further request for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. 

We grant the request and issue the following order.
We order appellant to file a brief with the clerk of this court on or before 

October 30, 2018. If appellant does not timely file the brief as ordered, the court 

will dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

PER CURIAM
Order entered July 10, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00054-CV

BARBARA MEREDITH, Appellant

V.

OXFORD TOWNHOMES, LLC, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-10-07847-B

ORDER

We GRANT appellees’ July 7, 2015 agreed motion for an extension of time to file their 

cross-appellees’ brief. Appellees shall file their cross-appellees’ brief by AUGUST 10, 2015.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 492 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 492

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 17, 2019.
    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to 
consider in the House the bill (H.R. 582) to provide for increases in the 
Federal minimum wage, and for other purposes. All points of order against 
consideration of the bill are waived. The amendment in the nature of a 
substitute recommended by the Committee on Education and Labor now printed in 
the bill, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the 
Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted. 
The bill, as amended, shall be considered as read. All points of order against 
provisions in the bill, as amended, are waived. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, and on any further amendment 
thereto, to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of 
debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member 
of the Committee on Education and Labor; (2) the further amendment printed in 
part B of the report of the Committee on Rules, if offered by the Member 
designated in the report, which shall be in order without intervention of any 
point of order, shall be considered as read, shall be separately debatable for 
the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent 
and an opponent, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the 
question; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
EX-10.1



 Exhibit No. 10.1 
 Schedule of Officers – Form of Change in Control Agreement 
 Set forth below is a list
of Officers who have entered into the form of Change in Control Agreement with Armstrong World Industries, Inc. filed as Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K filed on July 6, 2010: 

Victor D. Grizzle 
 Mark A. Hershey 

Donald R. Maier 
 Thomas B. Mangas 

Stephen F. McNamara 
 Stephen H. Poole

 Frank J. Ready 
 Ellen R. Romano
#### DSM, Inc., Appellant, v Paul Reiser Excavating, Inc., Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 203]

In an action to recover unpaid rent, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Onofry, J.), entered March 20, 2012, which, upon a decision of the same court, made after a nonjury trial, is in favor of it and against the defendant in the principal sum of only $2,750.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

To the extent that the plaintiff challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support the Supreme Court’s determination as to the defendant’s counterclaim, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review, since it failed to move pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law at the close of the evidence *(see Miller v Miller,*68 NY2d 871, 873 [1986]; *Zere Real Estate Servs., Inc. v Parr Gen. Contr. Co., Inc.,*102 AD3d 770, 772 [2013]).

The plaintiff’s contention that the Supreme Court’s factual determinations were contrary to the weight of the evidence is without merit. “Although an appellate court’s authority in reviewing a nonjury determination is as broad as that of the trial court, due deference is given to the trial court’s determination” with respect to issues of credibility, and the Appellate Division must “tak[e] into account that in a close case the trial judge has the advantage of seeing and hearing the witnesses” *(Marinoff v Natty Realty Corp.,*34 AD3d 765, 767 [2006]; *see Northern Westchester Professional Park Assoc. v Town of Bedford,*60 NY2d 492, 499 [1983]; *Zere Real Estate Servs., Inc. v Parr Gen. Contr. Co., Inc.,*102 AD3d at 772). With that limita*577tion in mind, the Appellate Division may render the judgment that is warranted by the facts *(see Northern Westchester Professional Park*Assoc. *v Town of Bedford,*60 NY2d at 499).

Here, the Supreme Court was faced with conflicting testimony as to the parties’ agreement, and it chose to credit the evidence indicating that the defendant entered into month-to-month leases with the plaintiff for two successive winters while it was engaged in snow removal. Furthermore, the Supreme Court credited the evidence that demonstrated that the plaintiff owed the defendant $7,775 for work performed by the defendant and that, when this sum is set off against the amount of unpaid rent owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the sum of only $2,750. The Supreme Court’s determination is warranted by the facts, and there is no basis in the record for disturbing the Supreme Court’s factual determinations *(see Zere Real Estate Servs., Inc. v Parr Gen. Contr. Co., Inc.,*102 AD3d at 772; *Ng v Neng,*97 AD3d 645, 646 [2012]; *Lelekakis v Kamamis,*41 AD3d 662, 664 [2007]). Rivera, J.E, Hall, Roman and Miller, JJ., concur.
[997 NE2d 139, 974 NYS2d 314]

#### In the Matter of Robert E. Alexander.

Decided September 17, 2013

OPINION OF THE COURT

On consideration of the continuation of this Court’s August 22, 2013 suspension of Honorable Robert E. Alexander from the office of Justice of the Pembroke Town Court, Genesee County, it is ordered that the suspension is continued, with pay, effective immediately *(see*21 NY3d 1021 [2013]).

Concur: Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christopher Brinson, Appellant.

Submitted August 27, 2012;

decided September 13, 2012

Motion to vacate this Court’s August 10, 2012 preclusion order granted.
1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Supreme Court Cause No. DA 21-0426

__________________________________________________________________

FLYING T RANCH, LLC, a Montana 

limited liability company,

Plaintiff and Appellee ORDER

 v.

CATLIN RANCH, LP, a Montana 

limited partnership

 Defendant and Appellant

MEAGHER COUNTY BY & THROUGH

ITS COMMISSION, SCOTT JACKSON, 

LYNN JACKSON, DEBRA WILLIAMS,

LISA ANDERSON, BERT WILLIAMS & 

CONNIE HIX

Defendants

__________________________________________________________________

CATLIN RANCH, LP, a Montana limited partnership,

Cross-Claimant and Appellant,

v.

DEBRA WILLIAMS, LISA ANDERSON, BERT WILLIAMS 

and CONNIE HIX,

Cross-claim Defendants and Appellees.

__________________________________________________________________

09/27/2021

Case Number: DA 21-0426
2

BEFORE the Court is Appellant Catlin Ranch, LP’s Unopposed Motion to 

Stay Deadline for Filing Appellant’s Opening Brief. For good cause shown 

thereby and there being no objection from Appellees, it is hereby ORDERED:

The deadline for Appellant Catlin Ranch, LP to file its Opening Brief is 

hereby stayed up to and including December 10, 2021.

SO ORDERED.

DATED this ___ day of September, 2021. 

______________________

Hon. Chief Justice Mike McGrath

.cc:

Matthew W. Williams

Brian Gallik

Hanna Warhank

Rachel Ann Taylor

Susan Brooks Swimley

Vuko Voyich

Jim Lippert

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 27 2021
**Exhibit
      99.4**




CERTIFICATE
      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 (the “Quarterly Report”) on the Form 10-QSB
      of Loma Verde Inc. (“Loma”) for the six months ended March 31, 2006, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Virgilio
      Santana, Chief Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director,
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
      belief:





1.
      The
      Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a) or
      15
      (d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2.
      The
      information contained in this Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of Loma.








Date:  
      May 30, 2006





VIRGILIO
      SANTANA


Virgilio
      Santana


Chief
      Accounting Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Director





-1-
IV 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 175 

Expressing support for the designation of the week of June 1, 2019, through 

June 9, 2019, as National Fishing and Boating Week. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 5, 2019 

Mr. JOYCE of Ohio (for himself, Mrs. BEATTY, Ms. FRANKEL, and Mrs. 

WALORSKI) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the 

Committee on Natural Resources, 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 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing support for the designation of the week of June 

1, 2019, through June 9, 2019, as National Fishing 

and Boating Week. 

Whereas over 141.6 million Americans go boating each year, 

including 71.1 million adults and 70.5 million children; 

Whereas the recreational boating industry contributes $170.3 

billion to the national economy in direct, indirect, and induced spending, which supports over 35,000 businesses 

and 691,000 direct and indirect jobs in the United 

States; 

Whereas the Bureau of Economic Analysis of the Department 

of Commerce has estimated that recreational boating and 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 175 IH 

fishing contributes $36.9 billion to the United States 

gross domestic product; 

Whereas 95 percent of boats sold in the United States are 

made in the United States; 

Whereas there are approximately 1,300 active marine manufacturers in the United States, using materials and services contributed from all 50 States; 

Whereas boaters are stewards of the environment, contributing $600 million in excise taxes annually to the Sport 

Fish Restoration and Boating Trust Fund which funds 

habitat conservation and restoration efforts, preserving 

our natural resources for future generations; and 

Whereas boating provides opportunities for families to be together, appeals to all age groups, and has a beneficial effect on the physical fitness and scholastic performance of 

those who participate: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the designation of National Fish3 ing and Boating Week; and 

4 (2) recognizes that the recreational boating 

5 community and the boating industry of the United 

6 States should be commended for their numerous 

7 contributions to the economy of the United States, 

8 the well-being of United States citizens, and respon9 sible environmental stewardship of water resources 

10 of the United States. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

JOSEPH F. SPERA , D.M.D, §

§ No. 159, 2023

Claimant

- Below, §

Appellant, § Court Below: Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

v. §

§ C.A. No.: N22A

- 08

- 001 (N)

MID

- ATLANTIC DENTAL §

SERVICE HOLDINGS

, §

§

Employer

- Below, §

Appellee. §

Submitted: November 29, 2023

Decided: November 29, 2023

Before SEITZ , Chief Justice; VALIHURA , and LEGROW

, Justices.

ORDER

After careful consideration of the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, we

conclude that the judgment below should be affirmed on the basis of and for the

reasons assigned by the Superior Court in its April 20, 2023 Memorandum Opini on

affirming the Industrial Accident Board’s Decision Denying Appellant’s Petition to

Determine Compensation Due.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Abigail M. LeGrow

Justice
UNITED STATES AIR FORCE

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

________________________

No. ACM S32396 (f rev)

________________________

UNITED STATES

Appellee

v.

Rashaad D. MICKENS

Airman Basic (E-1), U.S. Air Force, Appellant

________________________

Appeal from the United States Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 21 September 2017

________________________

Military Judge: James R. Dorman.

Approved sentence: Bad-conduct discharge, confinement for 3 months, and a 

reprimand. Sentence adjudged 2 March 2016 by SpCM convened at Offutt Air 

Force Base, Nebraska. 

For Appellant: Major Travis L. Vaughan, USAF.

Before DREW, JOHNSON, and MINK, Appellate Military Judges.

________________________

This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as 

precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.

________________________

PER CURIAM:

We have this case for further review because the staff judge advocate originally erred in advising the convening authority that he could not disapprove 

the confinement portion of Appellant’s sentence, in whole or in part. See United 

States v. Mickens, No. ACM S32396, 2017 CCA LEXIS 336 (A.F. Ct. Crim. App. 

18 May 2017) (unpub. op.). Having resolved that issue, we find the approved 

findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no error materially prejudicial to Appellant’s substantial rights occurred. Articles 59(a) and 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c). 
United States v. Mickens, No. ACM S32396 (f rev)

2

Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED.

FOR THE COURT

KURT J. BRUBAKER

Clerk of the Court
#### Jean-Francois Serval et al., Respondents, v Jean-Louis Vorburger, Appellant.

[822 NYS2d 446]

Appeals from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.H.O.), entered March 3, 2006, which, in a proceeding to dissolve a partnership, inter alia, held that defendant’s attorney is not entitled to retain any of the money he received in connection with certain services allegedly rendered to or benefitting the partnership, and directed defendant’s attorney to turn over all of such money to the partnership, unanimously dismissed, with costs in favor of plaintiffs.

Defendant is not aggrieved by the order directing his attorney to turn over money (CPLR 5511; *see Levine v Angsten,*6 AD3d 340 [2004]; *Broadway Equities v Metropolitan Elec. Mfg. Co.,*306 AD2d 426, 427 [2003]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 25 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
H. Res. 25

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                       January 4, 2019.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Agriculture: Mr. Conaway.
    Committee on Armed Services: Mr. Thornberry.
    Committee on Education and Labor: Ms. Foxx of North Carolina.
    Committee on Foreign Affairs: Mr. McCaul.
    Committee on Homeland Security: Mr. Rogers of Alabama.
    Committee on the Judiciary: Mr. Collins of Georgia.
    Committee on Natural Resources: Mr. Bishop of Utah.
    Committee on Oversight and Reform: Mr. Jordan.
    Committee on Rules: Mr. Cole, Mr. Woodall, Mr. Burgess, Mrs. Lesko.
    Committee on Science, Space, and Technology: Mr. Lucas.
    Committee on Small Business: Mr. Chabot.
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Mr. Graves of Missouri.
    Committee on Veterans' Affairs: Mr. David P. Roe of Tennessee.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### Glenda Garcia, Appellant, v Riverbay Corporation, Respondent.

[976 NYS2d 877]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kibbie F. Payne, J.), entered August 14, 2012, which, in an action for personal injuries, denied plaintiffs motion to vacate a prior order granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment upon plaintiffs default, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court exercised its discretion in a provident manner in *543denying the motion to vacate the default. Plaintiff failed to offer a reasonable excuse for the default, as her counsel made only conclusory assertions of having been engaged in another trial, without any support and without naming the time and dates of such engagement, the court, the judge or any other details (see *Polanco v City of New York,*78 AD3d 617 [1st Dept 2010]; 22 NYCRR 125.1). Nor did counsel’s conclusory statement that he was “under the impression” that plaintiff’s ex parte motion for an adjournment had been granted constitute a reasonable excuse (see *Galaxy Gen. Contr. Corp. v 2201 7th Ave. Realty LLC,*95 AD3d 789, 790 [1st Dept 2012]).

Moreover, plaintiff lacks a meritorious cause of action. Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, Moskowitz, Freedman and Clark, JJ.
Opinion issued March 11, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-13-01090-CV

———————————

IN RE PEYTON WATERS, JR., Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss the petition for writ of 

mandamus.

1

 No opinion has issued. Accordingly, we grant the motion and 

 

1

The underlying case is Bertila Chicas, Individually and as Representative of the 

Estate of Santiago Chicas, Deceased, Iris Chicas, Brenda Gonzalez, Norma 

Chicas, and Jesse Chicas v. Peyton Waters, Jr., cause number 417,965-401, 

pending in the Probate Court No. 2 of Harris County, Texas, the Hon. Mike Wood

presiding.
2

dismiss relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. Cf. TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a). We 

dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Sharp.