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


     

    Exhibit
10.1

    COGNOVIT
PROMISSORY NOTE OF

    JOHN
D. OIL AND GAS COMPANY

     

    
      	
              $600,000

            	
              February
      13, 2009  

            


    

    


    For value
received, the undersigned, promises to pay to the order of Great Plains
Exploration, LLC the principal sum of six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000.00) with interest
payable at the rate of 8.0% per month.  Principal is payable in the
amount of one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000.00) per month plus
accrued but unpaid interest on the twenty-eighth date of each month beginning on
March 28, 2009.

    


    The
indebtedness evidenced hereby may be prepaid in whole or in part at any time
without penalty or notice.

    


    Notwithstanding
anything to the contrary which may be provided for, or implied by, the other
terms of this Note, the entire principal balance, together with all accrued and
unpaid interest and any other charges, advances and fees, if any, outstanding
hereunder, shall be due and payable in full on demand if the maker is more than
thirty (30) days in arrears under this Note.

    


    The Maker
waives demand presentment for payment, protest, notice of protest and of
non-payment, and any and all lack of diligence or delays in collection or
enforcement of this Note, and expressly consents to any extension of time of
payment hereof, or any other indulgence of forbearance, any of which may be made
without notice to any party and without in any way affecting the personal
liability of any party.

    


    The
undersigned authorize any attorney-at-law to appear in any court of record in
Lake County, Ohio after the indebtedness evidenced hereby becomes due in
accordance with the terms hereof, whether by acceleration or otherwise, and to
thereupon waive the issuing and service of process, waive presentment, demand,
notice of dishonor, protest and notice of non-payment, and to confess judgment
against the undersigned Makers, in favor of the holder hereof for the amount
then appearing due together with the costs of this suit, and thereupon to waive
all errors and all rights of appeal and stays of execution.

    


    WARNING:
BY SIGNING THIS PAPER, YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT TO NOTICE AND COURT
TRIAL.  IF YOU DO NOT PAY ON TIME, A COURT JUDGMENT MAY BE TAKEN
AGAINST YOU WITHOUT YOUR PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND THE POWERS OF A COURT CAN BE USED
TO COLLECT FROM YOU REGARDLESS OF ANY CLAIMS YOU MAY HAVE AGAINST THE CREDITOR
WHETHER FOR RETURNED GOODS, FAULTY GOODS, FAILURE ON HIS PART TO COMPLY WITH THE
AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER CAUSE.

    


    JOHN
D. OIL AND GAS COMPANY

    


    
      	
              By:

            	
              /s/ Gregory J. Osborne

            	 
      
	 
      	
              Gregory
      J. Osborne, President and Chief Operating
  Officer
EXHIBIT 11

                        SALIVA DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS, INC.
                         COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER SHARE
                                  (UNAUDITED)




                                              THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
                                          ==================================
                                               2004                 2003
                                               ----                 ----

     Basic earnings:

     Net loss                             $     (148,280)     $     (410,976)
                                          ==============      ==============
     Shares:
     Weighted common shares
     outstanding                              30,509,700          18,485,047
                                          ==============      ==============
     Basic and diluted loss per
     share                                $        (0.01)     $        (0.02)
                                          ==============      ==============
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v John L. Bryant, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 519]

Present—Scudder, P.J., Hurlbutt, Centra, Lunn and Green, JJ.
1 The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska, adopting the report and recommendation of the Honorable Thomas D. Thalken, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Nebraska. ___________ No. 95-3081

___________
United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Nebraska. Eric V. Miller, * * [TO BE PUBLISHED] Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: December 20, 1995 Filed: January 19, 1996

___________ Before WOLLMAN, MAGILL, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
Eric V. Miller challenges his conviction under 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(u) (West Supp. 1995) for stealing firearms previously transported in interstate commerce, entered upon his conditional guilty plea. For reversal, Miller asserts that the district court 1 erred in rejecting his argument that section 922(u) violates the Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Miller relies on United States v. Lopez , 115 S. Ct. 1624 (1995) (concluding thatCongress exceeded its Commerce Clause authority in enacting GunFree School Zones Act of 1990, 18 U.S.C. § 922(q)). Miller also maintains that section 922(u) is inconsistent with its legislative history. We affirm.-2- Section 922(u) provides:
It shall be unlawful for a person to steal or unlawfully take or carry away from the person or the premises of a person who is licensed to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, any firearm in the licensee's business inventory that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

Reviewing the constitutionality of section 922(u) de novo, see United States v. McMurray , 34 F.3d 1405, 1413 (8th Cir. 1994), cert. denied , 115 S. Ct. 1164 (1995), we agree with the district court that Miller's Lopez challenge fails. In United States v. Shelton , 66 F.3d 991, 992 (8th Cir. 1995) (per curiam), we upheld 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) against a Lopez challenge. We held that,because the language of section 922(g) contained an interstateelement requirement, the statute ensured through case-by-case inquiry that the firearm in question affected interstate commerce. Id. ; see alsoUnited States v. Rankin , 64 F.3d 338, 339 (8th Cir. (per curiam) (holding § 922(g)(1) clearly tied to interstate commerce), cert denied , 64 U.S.L.W. 3397 (U.S. Dec. 4, 1995) (No. 95-6563). Like section 922(g), the plain language of section 922(u) contains an interstate-commerce nexus as an essential element of the offense and thus ensures that the firearm in question affects interstate commerce. In view of the plain language of section 922(u), we agree with the district court that it is not necessary to refer to legislative history. See Hunger v. AB; CD; EF; GH , 12 F.3d 118, 121 (8th Cir.), cert. denied , 114 S. Ct. 2676 (1994).

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.-3- A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.1
 WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2008 filed on
the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Annual Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and(b)
    
    the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Michael P. Skarzynski

Michael P. SkarzynskiChief Executive OfficerDate: March 2, 2009/s/ Sean R. CreamerSean R. CreamerChief Financial OfficerDate: March 2, 2009
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-11432

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

DWIGHT CLARK TONEY, also known as “D,”

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:14-CR-466-5

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Defendant-Appellant Dwight Clark Toney pleaded guilty, without a plea 

agreement, to conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance, namely 3,4-

methlyenedioxy-N-ethylcathinone (“ethylone” or “Molly”). The district court 

sentenced him within the applicable Guidelines range to 54 months of 

imprisonment, to be followed by three years of supervised release. Ethylone is 

not listed in the Guidelines, so the presentence report (PSR) used a drug with 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 22, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11432 Document: 00514482168 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2018
No. 16-11432

2

a comparable chemical structure, methlyenedioxy-N-ethylamphetamine 

(“MDEA”), to determine the base offense level. See U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, comment. 

(n.6). Pursuant to the commentary to § 2D1.1, the PSR converted the different 

controlled substances to their marijuana equivalents to determine a single 

offense level. For the Molly/MDEA, the PSR used the Guidelines conversion 

rate of one gram of MDEA to 500 grams of marijuana. On appeal, Toney argues 

that when the district court denied his objection to the 1:500 ratio, it committed 

a procedural error by failing to recognize its authority to vary from the 

Guidelines based on Toney’s policy arguments.

The Government contends that plain error review applies because Toney 

failed to preserve this issue below. See Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129, 

135 (2009). Even if the issue was preserved, however, Toney is not entitled to 

relief. See United States v. Alcantar, 733 F.3d 143, 146 n.4 (5th Cir. 2013). 

The district court commits a “significant procedural error” by “failing to 

calculate (or improperly calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the

Guidelines as mandatory, failing to consider the [18 U.S.C.] § 3553(a) factors, 

selecting a sentence based on clearly erroneous facts, or failing to adequately 

explain the chosen sentence.” Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). 

Here, the district court repeatedly referred to the Guidelines as advisory, 

considered the parties’ arguments and the appropriate sentencing factors, and 

gave reasons for its sentence, which reasons were tied to those factors. Toney

has not shown any error, much less a plain one. See United States v. Fraga, 

704 F.3d 432, 439 (5th Cir. 2013).

The district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

 Case: 16-11432 Document: 00514482168 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2018
EXHIBIT
32.1



CERTIFICATION
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 of Arizona Gold and Onyx Mining Company f/k/a Viking Capital Group, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”),
I, Michael Mitsunage, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
SS. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



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



May 8, 2018



| | /s/
    Michael Mitsunage                  
| | -------------------------------------------
| | Michael
    Mitsunage                      
| | (Chief
    Executive Officer and President)



A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise
adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 577 

To amend the Clean Air Act to eliminate the corn ethanol mandate for 

renewable fuel. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 26, 2015 

Mr. TOOMEY (for himself, Mrs. FEINSTEIN, and Mr. FLAKE) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To amend the Clean Air Act to eliminate the corn ethanol 

mandate for renewable fuel. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Corn Ethanol Mandate 

5 Elimination Act of 2015’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF CORN ETHANOL MANDATE FOR 

7 RENEWABLE FUEL. 

8 (a) REMOVAL OF TABLE.—Section 211(o)(2)(B)(i) of 

9 the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(o)(2)(B)(i)) is amend10 ed by striking subclause (I). 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•S 577 IS

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 

2 211(o)(2)(B) of the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 

3 7545(o)(2)(B)) is amended— 

4 (1) in clause (i)— 

5 (A) by redesignating subclauses (II) 

6 through (IV) as subclauses (I) through (III), 

7 respectively; 

8 (B) in subclause (I) (as so redesignated), 

9 by striking ‘‘of the volume of renewable fuel re10 quired under subclause (I),’’; and 

11 (C) in subclauses (II) and (III) (as so re12 designated), by striking ‘‘subclause (II)’’ each 

13 place it appears and inserting ‘‘subclause (I)’’; 

14 and 

15 (2) in clause (v), by striking ‘‘clause (i)(IV)’’ 

16 and inserting ‘‘clause (i)(III)’’. 

17 (c) ADMINISTRATION.—Nothing in this section or the 

18 amendments made by this section affects the volumes of 

19 advanced biofuel, cellulosic biofuel, or biomass-based diesel 

20 that are required under section 211(o) of the Clean Air 

21 Act (42 U.S.C. 7545(o)). 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
No. 1278.

#### Kruse *v.*Ragen, Warden.

June 10, 1946.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Illinois denied.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 143 (Tuesday, July 28, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 37241]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-17979]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (09-069)]


Review of U.S. Human Space Flight Plans Committee; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public 
Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration announces a meeting of the Review of U.S. Human Space 
Flight Plans Committee.

DATES: Wednesday, August 12, 2009, 1 p.m.-5 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center 
Amphitheater, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20004.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Philip R. McAlister, Office of 
Program Analysis and Evaluation, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration, Washington, DC 20546. Phone 202-358-0712.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The meeting will be open to the public up to 
the seating capacity of the room. It is imperative that the meeting be 
held on this date to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key 
participants.
    The agenda topics for the meeting include:

<bullet> Committee Deliberations
    [cir] Discussion of Final Options
    [cir] Discussion of Final Report
    [cir] Close-out Activities

P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. E9-17979 Filed 7-27-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
No. 996.

#### American Stevedores, Inc. *v.*Porello et al.

May 6, 1946.

*Edward Ash*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General McGrath*for the United States, and *George J. Engelman*for Porello, respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit granted.
Exhibit 31.4

Woodward, Inc.

Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) certifications

 

CERTIFICATION

 

I, Robert F. Weber, Jr., certify that:

|  | 1. |  | I have reviewed this Amendment to the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended September 30, 2013, of Woodward, 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; |
|--|----|--|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                           |   |   |                                                                                                 |
|--------------------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Date:  June 12, 2014 |   |   | /s/ Robert F. Weber, Jr.                                                                             |
|                           |   |   | Robert F. Weber, Jr.                                                                                 |
|                           |   |   | Vice Chairman, Chief Financial Officer, and

Treasurer

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |

 A signed original of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a), has been provided to Woodward and will be retained by Woodward and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                      30,956,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               20,994,000
<ALLOWANCES>                               (1,926,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            54,637,000
<PP&E>                                       5,643,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,781,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              61,344,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       24,875,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        94,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  35,567,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                61,344,000
<SALES>                                     27,075,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,075,000
<CGS>                                       15,591,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,591,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            11,258,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               694,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (863,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,089,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (546,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            543,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   543,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06


</TABLE>
No. 1163.

#### Vlahos *v.*Illinois.

May 20, 1946.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Criminal Court of Cook County, Illinois, denied.
|  | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10‐K of SB/RH Holdings, LLC (the “registrant”) for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2018; and |
|--|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|  | 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. |
|--|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Douglas L. Martin |   |
|--------|----------------------------|--------|
|   | Douglas L. Martin     |   |
|   | Chief Financial Officer    |   |

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer of Zale Corporation,
certifies, to the best of her knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year end July 31, 2003, which accompanies this certification
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in the periodic report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Zale Corporation at the dates and for the periods indicated.
The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose.

This 9th day of October, 2003.

| |     |                                                
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------
| | By: | /s/ Mary L. Forté                              
| |     |                                                
| |     |                                                
| |     | Mary L. Forté                                  
| |     | President and Chief Executive Officer, Director
| |     | (principal executive officer of the registrant)