alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE**

 

**OFFICEROF GENERAL PARTNER OF HILAND HOLDINGS GP, LP**

 

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the report on Form 10-Q for the three monthsended March 31, 2009 of Hiland Holdings GP, LP (the “Company”) and filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Joseph L. Griffin, Chief Executive Officer and President of Hiland PartnersGP Holdings, LLC, the general partner of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
| Date: May 11, 2009 | /s/ Joseph L. Griffin                  |
|-------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                    | Joseph L. Griffin                      |
|                    | Chief Executive Officer  and President |

 

----
#### Steam-Gauge *&*Lantern Co. and others *v.*Rogers and others.

*(Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.*

April 15, 1887.)

Patents for Inventions — Infringement—No. 244,944—Amendment of Decree.

*E. S. Jenney,*for complainants.

*George II. Knight,*for defendants.

Nelson, J.

And now, at the suggestion of the parties, who appear by their respective attorneys, E. S. Jenney for complainants, and George H. Knight for defendants, it is ordered that the opinion of the court on file in this case (29 Fed. Rep. 453) be corrected by striking out the words “bent partly round,” in the last paragraph, and inserting in place thereof the words “passed through loops on,” so that the first two clauses thereof shall read as follows:

> *“*The defendants’ lantern differs from the plaintiffs’ only- in the following particulars: In the former the side wires are hooked into the lower perforated plate, instead of being wound round or under it; and, in place of guid«s, they are supported laterally, by being *passed through loops on*the side tubes.”
#### Julia Ann BRIGGS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. WHEELING MACHINE PRODUCT CO., also known as U.S. Steel, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 12-3702.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: March 1, 2013.

Filed: March 7, 2013.

Julia Ann Briggs, Pine Bluff, AR, pro se.

Before MURPHY, SMITH, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Julia Briggs appeals the district court’s128 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) preservice dismissal of her complaint asserting a claim of disability discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) against her former employer. Upon careful de novo review, *see Moore v. Sims,*200 F.3d 1170, 1171 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (standard of review), we agree with the district court that Briggs’s disability-discrimination claim was barred. We first note that, according to Briggs’s own assertions in her complaint, she failed to file a timely charge with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). *See*42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(e)(1) (180-day administrative filing period under Title VII; 300-day filing period if person initially instituted state or local agency proceedings); 42 U.S.C. § 12117(a) (§ 2000e5 applies to ADA); *Nat’l R.R. Passenger Corp. v. Morgan,*536 U.S. 101, 110, 122 S.Ct. 2061, 153 L.Ed.2d 106 (2002) (timely EEOC charge is mandatory). We further conclude that Briggs did not allege any facts indicating her untimely EEOC filing should be excused, even recognizing that she was pursuing unemployment benefits during the administrative filing period. *See Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.,*455 U.S. 385, 393, 102 S.Ct. 1127, 71 L.Ed.2d 234 (1982) (filing timely charge of discrimination with EEOC is subject to waiver, estoppel, and equitable tolling); *Henderson v. Ford Motor Co.,*403 F.3d 1026, 1033 (8th Cir.2005) (equitable tolling is appropriate when plaintiff, despite all due diligence, is unable to obtain vital information bearing on existence of claim; EEOC filing period will not be modified on basis of equitable estoppel *635unless employee’s failure to timely file is result of employer’s affirmative action).

Accordingly, we affirm. *See*8th Cir. R. 47B.

1

. The Honorable D.P. Marshall, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Exhibit 8.1
  Subsidiary*
    
    Year of Incorporation
    
    Jurisdiction of IncorporationHoshin GigaMedia Center, Inc.
    
    
    1998
    
    
    TaiwanGigaMedia Finance International Limited
    
    
    2000
    
    
    Cayman IslandsGigaMedia International Holdings Limited
    
    
    2004
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsCambridge Entertainment Software Limited
    
    
    2004
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsFunTown World Limited
    
    
    2005
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsGigaMedia Asia Limited
    
    
    2005
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsFunTown Hong Kong Limited
    
    
    1999
    
    
    Hong KongGigaMedia China Limited
    
    
    2005
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsCambridge Interactive Development Corporation (Quebec) Inc.
    
    
    2005
    
    
    CanadaCambridge Interactive Development Corporation
    
    
    1997
    
    
    U.S.A.Internet Media Licensing Limited
    
    
    2005
    
    
    British Virgin IslandsGigaMedia Europe Limited S.à.r.l.
    
    
    2010
    
    
    LuxembourgGigaMedia Asia Pacific Limited
    
    
    2006
    
    
    British Virgin Islands
 
 *
    
    Includes significant subsidiaries of GigaMedia Limited only.
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Virtual Radiologic Corporation;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 registrants 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)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 registrant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; and(c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants
auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons
performing the equivalent functions):
 (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the
design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant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 registrants internal control
over financial reporting.
 Date:      May 1, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Leonard C. PurkisLeonard C. PurkisChief Financial Officer
EX-10.14



 Exhibit 10.14 
 BJ’S RESTAURANTS, INC. 
 2005 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN 

OPTION GRANT NOTICE 
 (2012 Gold Standard Stock Ownership Program) 
  

			
		
	 Name:
	  	
	 Employee ID (if applicable):
	  	

 You have been granted an option to buy shares of common stock of BJ’s Restaurants, Inc. (the “Company”) as
follows: 
  

			
	Grant Date:	  	
	Option Type	  	
	Option Price per Share:	  	
	Total Number of Shares:	  	
	Expiration Date:	  	 (unless earlier terminated Pursuant to the terms of your Option Notice or the attached Stock Option Agreement)


 The option is granted to you pursuant to the Company’s 2005 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended, and the terms of the
2012 Gold Standard Stock Ownership Program (“GSSOP”) thereunder. 
 Vesting Schedule: 

 

					
	 Vesting Period
	  	Award
Percentage
Vesting at
End of
Vesting
Period	 
		
	 Grant Date through 3rd Year Anniversary of Grant Date
	  	 	33	% 
	 Grant Date through 5th Year Anniversary of Grant Date
	  	 	67	% 

 Expiration 
 Unless otherwise specified above, vested options shall expire, terminate, or otherwise be forfeited as specified in Section 8 of the 2005 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) which provides
for expiration, termination or forfeiture as follows: (i) other than in circumstances covered by (ii), (iii), (iv) or (v) below, three (3) months after the effective date of termination of Active Status (as defined in the Plan)
of Optionee or, if Optionee is a Non-Employee Director (as defined in the Plan), six (6) months after the date Optionee ceases to be a Director; (ii) immediately upon termination of Optionee’s Active Status for Misconduct (as defined
in the Plan); (iii) twelve (12) months after the date on which Optionee, other than a Non-Employee Director, ceased performing services as a result of his or her total and permanent Disability (as defined in the Plan); (iv) twelve
(12) months after the date of the death of Optionee whose Active Status terminated as a result of his or her death; or (v) six (6) months after the date on which the Optionee ceased performing services as a result of Retirement (as
defined in the Plan). In no event shall any Option be exercisable after ten years from the Grant Date. 
 Agreement 

By your electronic authorization, you and the Company agree that this option is granted under and governed by the terms of the Stock Option Agreement, the
2012 GSSOP and the Plan (all of which are incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full in this document). 
  

			
	BJ’S RESTAURANTS, INC.
		
	By:	 	
		 	  

		
		 	Jerry Deitchle, Chief Executive Officer and President
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-8513

LARRY DONNELL GAITHER,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JACK B. CRAWLEY, JR.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District

Judge. (CA-95-971-5-BO)

Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: May 2, 1996

Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Donnell Gaither, 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

relief on 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 on the reasoning of the district

court. Gaither v. Crawley, No. CA-95-971-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Nov. 24,

1995). 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.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 10.4


                      AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

      This Amendment, dated as of March 1, 1997, amends that
certain Employment Agreement (the "Employment Agreement") dated
as of January 1, 1995, by and between Spectrum Information
Technologies, Inc. ("Employer") and Donald J. Amoruso
("Employee").

      1.  Paragraph 2 is amended and restated in its entirety as
follows:

           2.  Term of Employment.  Employee shall be an at-will
employee and the period during which Employee is employed by Employer
pursuant to this Agreement is called the "Term of Employment".

      2.  Paragraph 7.(b) is amended and restated in its entirety
as follows:

           7.(b) Employer retains the right to discharge Employee
for any reason not specified above. Employer agrees, however,
that if it discharges Employee for any reason other than "just
cause" as defined above, Employee will be entitled to full
compensation, including participation in all benefit programs set
forth in Section 4 hereof, subject to the provisions of such
Section 4, for one (1) year. In addition, all stock options for
the stock of Employer theretofore granted to Employee will
immediately vest and become immediately exercisable and will
remain exercisable throughout the original term of such option,
notwithstanding any provision to the contrary regarding
termination of employment in the stock option agreement issued in
respect of such stock option or any other stock option plan of
Employer pursuant to which such stock option may have been
granted. Employee shall not be required to mitigate the payments
provided for hereunder by seeking other employment or otherwise,
nor shall any such payments be offset by any other compensation
or earnings of the Employee following the termination of
employment. Employee's benefits pursuant to this paragraph are
and shall be payable immediately upon such discharge without just
cause.


           All other terms and provisions contained in the Employment
Agreement shall remain in effect.


                         Spectrum Information Technologies, Inc.


                         /s/ Sheldon A. Buckler
                         ------------------------------
                         By: Sheldon A. Buckler
                         Its: Chairman of the Compensation Committee


                         /s/ Donald J. Amoruso
                         ------------------------------
                         Donald J. Amoruso
#### Maria Swezey, Respondent, v Montague Rehab & Pain Management, P.C., et al., Defendants, and Shama Rasool, Appellant.

[855 NYS2d 153]

*524The plaintiff was required to undergo surgery to remove what she alleged was an acupuncture or electromyography needle that penetrated the right ventricle of her heart. She commenced an action against various chiropractors and acupuncturists alleging, inter alia, that they were negligent in allowing the needle to remain in her chest. She also commenced a second action (now consolidated with the first) against various physicians, including the appellant Shama Rasool, a psychiatrist, alleging, among other things, medical malpractice. Specifically, the plaintiff alleged, inter alia, that Dr. Rasool departed from good and accepted medical practice when she treated, as psychosomatic, her repeated complaints of chest and other physical pain without having medical tests performed to rule out an actual physical condition. Dr. Rasool moved, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her. We affirm the denial of such relief.

In support of the motion, Dr. Rasool submitted her own affidavit wherein she averred that she never agreed to “diagnose, evaluate or treat the plaintiff for any physical malady or condition,” and that the plaintiff never complained to her of “chest pain, heart pain or palpitations.” Thus, Dr. Rasool argued, she did not depart from good and accepted medical practice in her treatment of the plaintiff. However, in light of the plaintiffs sworn assertions that she made repeated complaints of chest and other physical pains to Dr. Rasool, and that Dr. Rasool assured her that such pains were in her “imagination,” Dr. Rasool’s sworn assertions that no such complaints were made merely raised issues of fact as to the same. Consequently, Dr. Rasool failed to establish her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and her motion, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her was properly denied regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers *(see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr.,*64 NY2d 851 [1985]). Ritter, J.P., Florio, Garni and Leventhal, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION**

     In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of MedPro Safety Products, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission onthe date hereof (the “Report”), I, W. Craig Turner, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, in accordance with 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), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2)     The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                       |                              |
|-----------------------|------------------------------|
|                  | MEDPRO SAFETY PRODUCTS, INC. |
|                  |                         |
| Dated: April 16, 2009 | By:/s/ W. Craig Turner       |
|                  | W. Craig Turner              |
|                  | Chief Executive Officer      |

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices 

# Order

May 27, 2020

158305

- 6

158307

- 8

In re RELIABILITY PLANS OF ELECTRIC

UTILITIES FOR 2017

- 2021.

______________________________________

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellee,

SC: 158305

v COA: 340600

MPSC: 00

- 018197

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellant,

and

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION, ENERGY MICHIGAN, INC.,

and MICHIGAN ELECTRIC AND GAS

ASSOCIATION,

A ppellees.

______________________________________

ENERGY MICHIGAN, INC.,

Appellee,

SC: 158306

v COA: 340607

MPSC: 00

- 018197

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,

Appellant,

and

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION and MICHIGAN ELECTRIC

AND GAS ASSOCIATION,

Appellees.

______________________________________/

ASSOCIATION OF BUSINESSES

ADVOCATING TARIFF EQUITY,

Appellee,I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 27, 2020

t0520 2

Clerk SC: 158307

v COA: 340600

MPSC: 00

- 018197

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION,

Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY,

ENERGY MICHIGAN, INC., and

MICHIGAN ELECTRIC AND GAS

ASSOCIATION,

Appellees.

______________________________________

ENERGY MICHIGAN, INC.,

Appellee,

SC: 158308

v COA: 340607

MPSC: 00

- 018197

MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE

COMMISSION,

Appellant,

and

CONSUMERS ENERGY COMPANY and

MICHIGAN ELECTRIC AND GAS

ASSOCIATION,

Appellees.

______________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for rehearing of the Court’s April 2, 2020

opinion is considered, and it is DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           3,111
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  257,775
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    388,425
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               660,696
<PP&E>                                         512,352
<DEPRECIATION>                                 326,199
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 863,103
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          617,312
<BONDS>                                        240,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        45,816
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   863,103
<SALES>                                      2,166,763
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,166,763
<CGS>                                        1,314,209
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,314,209
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              45,114
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (80,832)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (80,832)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>