alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NEE-06302013-EX.10c






Exhibit 10(c)
	
				
	Lewis Hay, III
Chairman
	 
	










April 15, 2013


Board of Directors
NextEra Energy, Inc.
700 Universe Boulevard
Juno Beach, FL 33408


Re:  Consent Under Waiver Letter Dated March 16, 2012


Ladies and Gentlemen:


Pursuant to that certain letter agreement dated March 16, 2012 entitled “Waivers under Certain Agreements” between NextEra Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) and me (the “Waiver Letter”), the Company agreed (among other things) “not to materially diminish my duties and responsibilities as Executive Chairman from time to time during the term of my employment under the Employment Letter from the duties and responsibilities set forth on Annex 1 to this letter without my prior written consent.”  Among the duties and responsibilities set forth on the referenced Annex 1 is “(d)irect responsibility for functions reporting through ... Human Resources.”


I understand that the Company wishes to transfer direct responsibility for Human Resources functions to the Company's President and Chief Executive Officer, effective upon my consent thereto.  I hereby consent to such transfer of direct responsibility for Human Resources functions, effective on the date hereof.


I hereby confirm that this Consent is the consent required under the Waiver Letter, which shall remain in full force and effect.


Very truly yours,


LEWIS HAY, III
Lewis Hay, III












700 Universe Boulevard, Juno Beach, FL 33408
Exhibit 31.1


                           302(a) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Hans-Werner Huss, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Integrated
    Micrometallurgical Systems, Inc.;

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 small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this
    report;

4.  The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
    responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
    procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15) and
    internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
    Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and we have:

  a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
      material information relating to the small business issuer, 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 small business issuer's 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.

5.  The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
    disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the small business
    issuer's auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer's
    board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

  a)  all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or
      operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are
      reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer's
      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 small business issuer's
      internal control over financial reporting.

Date: May 9, 2008

/s/ H. Werner Huss
------------------
H. Werner Huss,
President and Chief Executive Officer


<PAGE>
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 21

- 00347

- CV

M ARK M USE

, Appellant

V

.

Z HENYU M AO

, Appellee §

§

§

§ On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2

of Denton County ( CV

- 2021

- 02902

- JP )

March 10, 2022

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appea l in this case and holds that the

appeal should be dismissed. It is ordered that the appeal is dismissed as moot

.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

PER CURIAM
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-1786

MARY HARRIS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CAROLYN W. COLVIN, Acting Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. Stephanie A. Gallagher, Magistrate

Judge. (1:13-cv-02503-SAG)

Submitted: December 22, 2014 Decided: January 8, 2015

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mary Harris, Appellant Pro Se. Craig Ormson, SOCIAL SECURITY 

ADMINISTRATION, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Mary Harris appeals the magistrate judge’s order 

upholding the Commissioner’s denial of Harris’ applications for 

disability benefits and supplemental security income and the 

denial of her motion to alter or amend the judgment.∗ We have 

reviewed the record and discern no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district 

court. Harris v. Colvin, No. 1:13-cv-02503-SAG (D. Md. filed 

May 5, entered May 6, 2014; filed June 5, entered June 6, 2014). 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

 ∗ The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the 

magistrate judge. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (2012).
# Cover

The attached tables show Railroad Retirement Act annuitants age 18 or over, and active railroademployees by Congressional District.  Annuitant counts are individuals in current-payment statusin June 2021.  Active employee counts are the total number of employees covered by the Railroad Retirement and Railroad Unemployment Insurance Acts during calendar year 2020.The first list is in district order by State.  The second is ordered by the total number of clients (annuitants and workers) from highest to lowest.  Approximately 1 percent of the addressesdid not match or were missing and were excluded from this report.

# State Order

Page &P of &N	September 2021

# Size Order

Page &P of &N	September 2021
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1104 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1104

To prohibit the General Services Administration from awarding contracts 
 to certain insured depository institutions that avoid doing business 
with certain companies that are engaged in lawful commerce based solely 
                    on social policy considerations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 10, 2019

Mr. Kennedy (for himself and Mr. Cramer) introduced the following bill; 
which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security 
                        and Governmental Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit the General Services Administration from awarding contracts 
 to certain insured depository institutions that avoid doing business 
with certain companies that are engaged in lawful commerce based solely 
                    on social policy considerations.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No Red and Blue Banks Act''.

SEC. 2. INSURED DEPOSITORY INSTITUTIONS.

    (a) In General.--The General Services Administration may not award 
a contract to an insured depository institution, as defined in section 
3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813), or an 
affiliate of a depository institution if the insured depository 
institution or affiliate avoids doing business with certain companies 
that the insured depository institution or affiliate believes are 
engaged in lawful commerce based solely on social policy 
considerations.
    (b) Applicability.--This Act shall not apply to any contract 
awarded before the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL**

**OFFICEROF HILAND HOLDINGS GP, LP**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

In connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q forthe three months ended March 31, 2007 and filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ken Maples, ChiefFinancial Officer, Vice President-Finance and Secretary of Hiland Partners GPHoldings, LLC, the general partner of Hiland Holdings GP, LP (the “Company”),hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Date: June 6, 2007 |   | /s/ Ken Maples                                                 |
|--------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|
|               |   | Ken Maples                                                     |
|               |   | Chief Financial Officer, Vice President-Finance and  Secretary |

 

 

----
NO. 07-02-0457 -CR IN THE COU RT OF APP EALS FOR THE SEVENT H DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMA RILLO PANE L D MAY 12, 2003

______________________________ JAY N. GIANNUKOS, APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

_________________________________ FROM THE 35 9TH DIST RICT COURT OF MONTGO MERY COUNTY; NO. 02-03-02101-CR; H ONORAB LE JAM ES H. K EESH AN, JUD GE

_______________________________ Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPB ELL, JJ. ABA TEMENT AND REMA ND Pursuant to pleas of guilty, appellant J ay N . Gia nnukos was convicted in one judg me nton separate counts of unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon and possession of a controlled substance. B y his no tice of appeal, he challenges both convicti ons. The clerk’s record w as filed on J anuary 6 , 2003, and thereporter’s record2

was due on February 5, 2003, but has yet to be filed. Also, no requ est for an extens ion o f time w as filed. By letter dated April 22, 2003, this Court n otified Jill Driscoll, C our t R eporter of the 258th District Court, of the defect and reques ted that in the event th e record could not be im m edia tely filed, she com plete and file a request form provided by thisCourt no later than ten days fromthe date of the letter. Driscoll did not respond and the reporter’s record rem ains outstanding. Thus, we now abate the appeal and rema nd the cause to the t rial court for further proceedings. See Tex. R. A pp. P. 37.3(a)( 2). Upon reman d, the trial court shall imm ediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to determ ine the following: 1. w het her

app ellan t de sire s topro sec ute this app eal; 2. whether appellant is indigent; and 3. why appellant has been dep rived of a reporter’s record. The trial court shall cause the hearing to b e transcribed. Should it be determ ined that appellant doe s w

ant to cont inue this

appeal and is indigent, then the trial court shall take such measures as m ay be necessary to as sure appellant a reporter’s record. The trial court sha ll execute findings of fact, conclusions of law, and s uch orders as the court ma y enter regarding the aforem entioned issues, and cause its findings and conclusions to be included in a suppl emental clerk’s recor d. A supplemental recor d of the heari ng shall also be incl ude d in t he a ppe llaterecord . Fin ally, thetria l cou rt s hall f ile the suppl emental records with the C lerk of this Court by Friday, June 27, 2003.3

It is so ordered. Per Curiam Do not publish.
ot ¢3, FEU - ol
Thomas CROSS SR. RECEIVED iN

OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
Tocs- 10" N2I24g COURT JUL 27 205
Beto UNTT
costa, Clerk
iZa1 Fm 3328 AnelA

TENNESSEE CoLoNY \Tx 15880

CLERK oF Covkt

CooRt oF Catwr. APP.

AREL ACosiA

Po. Box [2308 - CaPrtot StATZON

Austin . Tx 7871 ; DaTé SvLy 2st, Zow

Dear CLEeRiL,
ENcLosel , PLease Find A CoP? OF MY CoRRESPONDENCE
LOTT The “TRtaAL Coukt Tn REGAROS TS EXPARTE Tomas DARRELL

CRosS DR, WR-B3 3B56-Ol TR. Cr. No. CR2TGI5-B. Please Frce

Tears DocomenT WITH ALL OTHER PaPeRs Ty THzs Cavsé. Ttawl You.

ResPectzrvely \

fn —

Teoma Moss
oc3-z0 * 1721249,



Tons CRoss SR

Bo3- to" 10248

BéTS Uno

IBA) Frm 332B
Tennessee Cotony Tk 735880

“SvdGE MARL MoREFELLI)

1423 SAm Houston Ave ame Jou

LIGERTY , Texas T7515 Date: Sour Zist,2a15

Rer ExParte Thomas Daaheee Cass "SR uIR- B, 35601 CThtar Gr.
Nf) ERVAGI 5B :

Hour Wonor \

Resrecizves, Tve Rerear enue dequested T AT THe Cuerid

Pease Send PAE OA Goby oF. tou “onoeR, dese GNATING ContRoy~
eared Lniesowven Hsve S$) Tu Bene Rewanas To Tag Bove

Srvted Amd Nuraneieo ott - Bef) "Te SratEs Resfonsé ThenéTa
TF One Has Beem Faved . SER, Caw You PLease oadER The Creede And
Dustteer ATiotncy Te ADueke Te ait. 107 set 7 and Reowe PRovrde

Mé Lottn CoPies oF These Documents Th Actotd wottu The Laws,

Pace



MY Pea FoR These Documents Have WENT ONANSusenEd. Caw

You Please MeL mc GeT Thea. Toate You.

Reshe GT FOLLY
Ai. “—
ae oo

Thomas LAS
Tacy-10" Ae |

C.G., + Freem
LEBEATY County BA.

~Couts of Binawak APeALS

Pace h
EXHIBIT 10.14

                          BODDIE-NOELL PROPERTIES, INC.

                AMENDMENT TO NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT

         WHEREAS,  the  Company,  as approved by the  Committee  of the Board of
Directors,  has accelerated the vesting of 2,000 options (the "Options") granted
to W. CRAIG WORTHY pursuant to a Nonqualified  Stock Option  Agreement under the
1994 Stock  Option and  Incentive  Plan to be  effective  as of June 5, 1997 and
extended the exercise date of such Options to June 16, 2004.

         NOW,  THEREFORE the  Nonqualified  Stock Option Agreement with W. CRAIG
WORTHY (the "Agreement") is hereby amended in the following  respects  effective
as of June 5, 1997:

         1.       The Vesting and Exercise Schedule of Section 1 is restated
                  such that all of the 2,000 Shares shall have vested as of 
                  June 5, 1997.

         2.       The second  sentence of the second  paragraph  in Section 2 is
                  restated to read as follows:  "If Employee's  employment  with
                  the Company and all Subsidiaries is terminated under any other
                  circumstance  other than for Cause,  the vested portion of the
                  Option shall remain exercisable until June 16, 2004."

         3.       All other terms and  conditions of the Plan and the Agreement 
                  shall remain in full force and effect.



         IN WITNESS WHEREOF,  the parties hereto have executed this Amendment to
the Agreement as of June 5, 1997.

                                           BODDIE-NOELL PROPERTIES, INC.

                                           By:  /s/ Douglas E. Anderson
                                           Title:  Vice President

         The  undersigned   hereby  accepts  the  foregoing   Amendment  to  the
Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement and the terms and conditions hereof

                                                     /s/ W. Craig Worthy
                                                     W. Craig Worthy

                                       64
<PAGE>
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





The
undersigned, David Gorodyansky, the Chief Financial Officer of INTELLIGENT
BUYING. INC.  (the "Company"), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that:





1.
The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009
(the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2.
Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this statement this 18th day of
May 2009.





/s/
      David GorodyanskyDavid
      GorodyanskyPrincipal  Financial
      Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Intelligent Buying, Inc. and will be retained by Intelligent Buying, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DENNIS R. ENGLAND Appeal from the Criminal Court for Sumner County No. 9781 Jane Wheatcraft, Judge

No. M1999-00254-SC-R11-CO - Decided May 30, 2000

FOR PUBLICATION

J USTICE B IRCH , dissenting. I disagree with my colleagues. In my opinion, an officer must have reasonable suspicion of criminal act ivity b efore ordering a canine sweep during an otherwise lawful investigatory stop. Walter v. State

, 997 S.W.2d 853, 858-63 (Tex. Ct. App. 1999). Here, the trial court found that the officer’s investigation should have ended upon England’s having refused to consent to a search of his vehicl e. The trial cour t stated, “the off

icer used his (England’s) refusal as the basis on which to get the dog out of the car” to conduct a canine sweep. It is apparent from the record, therefore, that the officer’s sole reason for ordering the canine sweep was England’s ref

usal to consent. Th

e refusal to cons

ent to a search, h

owever, does not

constitute reasonable

suspicion. See United States v. White , 890 F.2d1413, 1417 n.4 (8 th Cir. 1989) (citing Florida v. Royer , 460 U.S. 491, 498, 10 3 S. Ct. 1319, 1324, 75 L. Ed. 2d 229, 236-37 (1983)); see also United States v. Fuentes , 105 F.3d487, 490 (9 th Cir. 1997); Karnes v. Skrutski , 62 F.3d 485, 495 (3 rd Cir. 1995); United States v. Manuel , 992 F.2d 272, 274 (10 th Cir. 1993). Thus, the officer in this case lacked the

necessary

reasonable

suspicion to justify a canine sweep. The canine sweep of England’s car, therefore, violated his rights under Article I , § 7 of the Tennessee Constitution. Moreover, if the officer c

an use England’s refusal as consent to the intrusive sweep, then why ask in the first place? Why not just subject every vehicle stopped for a minor equipment violation to a canine swee

p? I cannot condo

ne such a result a

nd therefore dis sent.
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 1 of 14 PageID: 2466
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 2 of 14 PageID: 2467
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 3 of 14 PageID: 2468
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 4 of 14 PageID: 2469
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 5 of 14 PageID: 2470
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 6 of 14 PageID: 2471
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 7 of 14 PageID: 2472
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 8 of 14 PageID: 2473
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 9 of 14 PageID: 2474
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 10 of 14 PageID: 2475
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 11 of 14 PageID: 2476
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 12 of 14 PageID: 2477
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 13 of 14 PageID: 2478
Case 2:11-cv-00296-WJM-MF Document 140-5 Filed 09/24/13 Page 14 of 14 PageID: 2479
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Hafeez Odofin, Appellant.

Submitted March 18, 2013;

decided March 21, 2013

Motion for an extension of the time within which to apply for permission to appeal pursuant to CPL 460.20 granted and motion papers treated as a timely CPL 460.20 application.
No. ________ 

In the

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals 

At Austin



Nos. 14-14-00154-CR & 14-14-00155-CR

In the

Court of Appeals

For the 

Fourteenth District of Texas 

At Houston



Nos. 1323841 & 1390391 

In the 185th District Court 

Of Harris County, Texas 



KOJUAN J. MILES

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

Appellee



STATE’S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH 

TO FILE A PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW



TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:

 THE STATE OF TEXAS, pursuant to TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1, 10.5(b) and 68.2(c), 

moves for an extension of time within which to file its reply to appellant’s brief on the 

merits. In support of its motion, the State submits the following: 

 

PD-0847&0848-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 7/16/2015 3:21:30 PM

Accepted 7/17/2015 3:20:07 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
2

1. Appellant was convicted of the offense of sexual assault of a child and 

sentenced to seven-years confinement. He also was convicted of the offense 

of compelling prostitution and sentenced to twenty-years confinement. The 

judge ordered the sentences to be served consecutively.

2. On June 16, 2015, the Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed the two 

convictions, but ordered the deletion of the cumulation order.

3. The State’s petition for discretionary review (PDR) is due on July 16, 2015.

4. The State seeks a 15-day extension until July 31, 2015, to file its PDR.

5. This is the State’s first request for an extension. 

6. The following facts are relied upon to show good cause for the requested 

extension:

My completion of this PDR has been delayed by my 

completion of three other appellate briefs this past month. I 

also have five other appellate briefs due in the next two weeks.
3

WHEREFORE, the State prays that this Court will grant the requested extension.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Dan McCrory

DAN MCCRORY

Assistant District Attorney

Harris County, Texas

1201 Franklin, Suite 600

Houston, Texas 77002

Mccrory_daniel@dao.hctx.net

(713) 755-5826

TBC No. 13489950

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a copy of the foregoing instrument has been emailed to the 

following email addresses via TexFile:

Nicolas Hughes

Assistant Public Defender

Nicolas.hughes@pdo.hctx.net

/s/ Dan McCrory

DAN MCCRORY

Assistant District Attorney

Harris County, Texas

1201 Franklin, Suite 600

Houston, Texas 77002

(713) 755-5826

TBC No. 13489950

Date: July 16, 2015